Index:  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X, Y, Z

The texts reproduced here do not have the legal standing of the original documents which are entrusted and kept at the WTO Secretariat in Geneva.

safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX)

see also determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements; investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c)); safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX), conditions (SG 2); standard/powers of review (safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX))

application of measures (SG 5)

imports, limitation to S.1.35.4


in case of quantitative restrictions (SG 5.1, second sentence) S.1.35.1, S.1.36.1

compliance with SG obligations as S.1.36.1

need for S.1.35

publication of analysis of case under investigation (SG 4(2)(c)) and S.1.36.1

proportionality (“to the extent necessary”) (SG 5.1) S.1.34

causal link (SG 4.2(b)) and S.1.36

extent of injury as test S.1.34.3

limitation to share of injury caused by increased imports S.1.35.3

right to apply measure distinguished S.1.35.2

“serious injury” (SG 5.1) / “serious injury” (SG 4.2(a)) distinguished S.1.35.2

quota modulation and (SG 5.2(b)) S.1.37


as balance between appropriate and legitimate right to protect domestic industry and obligation to maintain integrity of trade concessions R.1.1.1, S.1.38.2

exceptional nature of remedy S.1.1.1-2, S.1.45.1-2

relationship between Safeguards Agreement and GATT XIX S.1.44

continuing applicability of GATT XIX S.1.44.2-4

rules for application of GATT XIX (SG 1) S.1.44.2

WTO Agreement, Safeguards Agreement as integral part of (WTO II:2) G.2.1.3, S.1.44.3-4

customs unions and free trade areas (GATT XXIV) exception, applicability R.1.6, S.1.17.1

customs unions S.1.16

free trade areas S.1.17

developing countries and (SG 9) S.1.39

“applied” S.1.39.2

“against a product” S.1.39.2

expected effect of measure, relevance S.1.39.3

list of excluded countries, need for S.1.39.1

level of concessions (SG 8)

compensation for adverse effects (SG 8.1) S.1.38.2, S.1.42.4

“equivalent” S.1.38

adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) and S.1.38.1, S.1.42.3

notification and consultation (SG 12)

adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) S.1.42

good faith and S.1.42.4

level of concessions (SG 8.1) and S.1.38.1

meaningful exchange, need for S.1.41.1

time for S.1.42.3

of all pertinent information (SG 12.2) S.1.41

all factors listed in SG 12.2 and 4.2(a), need for S.1.41.2

date of introduction of measure S.1.41.1

precise description of proposed measure S.1.41.1

amendments to measure subsequent to consultation, effect S.1.42.2

“immediately” (SG 12.1, chapeau) S.1.40, S.1.41.3

taking of decision as critical factor (SG 12.3) S.1.40.3

timing (SG 12.1) / content (SG 12.2) distinguished S.1.41.3

publication obligations (SG 4.2(c)) S.1.33

interpretation by reference to SG 3 (investigation) C.2.4, S.1.33.1

unforeseen developments, need to include S.1.33.1, S.1.46.1

safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX), conditions (SG 2)  

causation (SG 2.1)

“imports” / “conditions” S.1.11.1

relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) / “under such conditions” (SG 2.1), equivalence S.1.12.1

exceptional conditions, need for S.1.45.2

existence of all requirements S.1.1.2

“is being imported” (SG 2.1), as sudden and recent increase S.1.6.1-2, S.1.8.1

“like or directly competitive product” (SG 2.1) S.1.3

specific product, need for S.1.3.1, S.1.49.1-3

parallelism between SG 2.1 and SG 2.2 S.1.13.1

prima facie failure to observe S.

“product being imported” S., S.

as pertinent issues of fact and law (SG 3.1) S.1.18.2, S.1.21.1-3, S.1.33.1

separate determinations S.1.10.1-4, S.1.15

“such increased quantities”

“as a result of unforeseen developments” (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.6.1-3, S.1.21.2, S.1.50

“as a result of” S.1.48

burden of proof S.1.22.3

demonstration, need for S.1.50.3-5

as pertinent issue of fact and law S.1.50.1-5

“such product” S.1.49

decrease in import quantities at end of investigation period, relevance S.1.8.2-3, S.1.28.2

“rate and amount of the increase … in absolute and relative terms” (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.7.1-4, S.1.29.1

“relative to domestic production” S.1.9.1

sufficient to cause serious injury or threat S.1.6.1-2, S.1.30.1-2

causal link, need to demonstrate S.1.31.1, S.1.31.7

“serious injury” and “threat”, whether mutually exclusive alternatives S.1.10

trends, need to examine S.1.7, S.1.29.1

territorial application S.1.5

sanitary and phytosanitary measures, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6)

comparability of measures, need for S.6.16

consistency in application (SPS 5.5) S.6.15

arbitrary or unjustifiable inconsistencies, exclusion S.6.4.1, S.6.15.1-2

discrimination or disguised restriction of trade resulting from inconsistency (SPS 2.3) S.6.15.2, S.6.17

absence of risk assessment as evidence of S.6.17.6

degree of difference sufficient to warn of S.6.17.5

distinctions in the level of protection in different situations S.6.16

comparability S.6.16.1-3

legal obligation, whether S.6.15.1

measures “not more trade restrictive than required to achieve their appropriate level of … protection” (SPS 5.6) S.6.18

“appropriate level”, determination

Member’s obligation S.6.1.4-5

Member’s right S.6.1.1, S.6.1.6

as preliminary to decision on measure S.6.1.2-3, S.6.1.6

requirements (SPS 5.6, footnote 3) S.6.18.1-2

right not to take if unwarranted by results of risk assessment S.6.10.5, S.6.20.4

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) T.1.11

see also Agreement on Agriculture (AG), Schedules of Commitments (AG 3) [and AG Annex 3], incorporation into AG 3 and 6; Schedules of Specific Commitments (GATS XX), interpretation

“charge equivalent to … imposed consistently with … Article III” (GATT II(2)(a)) T.1.1.7-8 

diminishment of obligations, exclusion T.1.3.1-2

temporal limitations, whether T.1.3.4

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) A.1.4A.1, B.2.1, I.3.5.4-5, I.3.9.8, I.3.10.13, T.1.2.1-2, T.1.2.12, T.1.3.1, T.1.3.3

interpretation and clarification T.1.2

applicable law A.1.4A.1, I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1, T.1.2.12-13

circumstances of conclusion (VCLT 32) I.3.10.18-27, T.1.2.3, T.1.2.10

see also interpretation of covered agreements, circumstances of conclusion of treaty (VCLT 32)

footnotes, status A.1.37.4, T.1.4.1

verification of tariff schedules T.1.2.7

World Customs Organization decisions and T.1.2.2

modification (GATT XXVIII) T.1.5

offsetting between tariffs on same product below and above bound rate T.1.1.4

ordinary customs duties in excess of those provided for in Schedule (GATT II:1(b)) T.1.1.1-3, T.1.1.5

duty different in type T.1.1.2

GATT II:2(a), interrelationship with A.3.64.3, B.3.3.21, N.1.1A.1, T.1.1.5, T.1.1.7-9, T.1.1A.1

GATT III:2, interrelationship H.1.9-11, N.1.1A, T.1.1A

“ordinary customs duties” T.1.1A.3, T.1.2.15

“terms, conditions or qualifications” T.1.3.4

zero rates, applicability to T.1.1.4, T.1.2.8

“subject to” (GATT II:1(b)) T.1.1.3

“terms, conditions or qualifications … in Schedule” T.1.1.3

Schedules of Specific Commitments (GATS XX), interpretation G.1.2.1

applicable law G., I.3.10.13

applicable law (customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)]) G.

context (VCLT 31(2))

1993 Scheduling Guidelines G., I.3.10.15-16

similarity of language G., I.3.10.15-16

any agreement made between the parties (VCLT 31(2)(a)) or accepted by parties (VCLT 31(2)(b)), Central Product Classification (CPC) and Services Sectoral Classification List (W/120), whether G.1.2.2, I.3.3.4-5

Central Product Classification (CPC) G.

different elements of “context” leading to different conclusions I.3.3.2-3, I.3.3.9

object and purpose of agreement (GATS, Preamble) G.

other Members’ Schedules G., G.

other parts of same schedule G.

progressive liberalization principle G.

Services Sectoral Classification List (W/120) G., G., G., I.3.3.4-5

structure of GATS G.1.1.9, G.

as integral part of GATS (GATS XX:3) G., I.3.10.13

preparatory work (VCLT 32), W/120 and 1993 Scheduling Guidelines as G., G., G., I.3.10.14-16


“audiovisual” G.

avoidance of ambiguity, need for G., I.3.10.15

common format and terminology, importance G., I.3.10.15

DSU 22.3(f) compared G.

mutual exclusion G.

“subsector” G.

subsequent practice (VCLT 31(3)(b)), 2001 Guidelines, whether G., I.3.9.6

supplementary means (VCLT 32), W/120 and 1993 Scheduling Guidelines 

as G., G., I.3.10.14

scientific evidence, need for sufficient (SPS 2.2) S.6.3

see also harmonization of measures (SPS 3); information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (SPS 11.2); risk assessment, need for (SPS 5.1-5.3 and Annex A, para. 4)

“on the basis of available pertinent information” S.6.20A.1

precautionary principle (SPS 5.7) S.6.3.6, S.6.19

provisional adoption of measures in case of insufficiency of scientific evidence (SPS 5.7) S.6.3.6, S.6.19, S.6.19.4, S.6.20

as alternative to SPS 5.1, need to justify B.3.5.2, S.6.3.8

burden of proof B.3.5.2

evidence of sufficiency S.6.20.5

existence of international standard S.6.20.5, S.6.20.7

new evidence S.6.20.5-6, S.6.20.8

“insufficiency” S.6.20.1-8

obligation to seek to obtain additional information S.6.20.4, S.6.21

developing countries and S.6.21.2 n. 1398

for more objective assessment of risk S.6.21.1

“relevant” S.6.20.1


additional information necessary for a more objective assessment (SPS 5.7(3)) S.6.19.4

best efforts S.6.19.4

cumulative nature S.6.18.1-2, S.6.19.2-3

“within a reasonable period of time” (SPS 5.7(4)) S.6.19.4

review within a “reasonable” period of time S.6.22

rational or objective relationship between SPS measure and scientific evidence, need for S.6.3.5

ad hoc determination S.6.3.5, S.6.3.7

proportionality and S.6.3.7

“sufficiency”, as relational concept S.6.3.4

SCM Agreement

adverse effects (SCM 5): see serious prejudice (SCM 6)

consultations: see consultations (DSU 4)

countervailing duties: see countervailing duties (SCM, Part V)

determination of injury: see determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15)

developing country Members and: see developing countries, special and differential treatment (SCM 27)


ordinary meaning O.2.9, S.2.19B.3.1

same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1, S.2.19B.3

investigation (AD 5): see investigation of dumping (AD 5) / subsidy (SCM 11)

investigations and reviews of existing measures, initiated … on or after date of entry into force of WTO Agreement (SCM 32.3) S.2.41.2

object and purpose, balanced framework of rights and obligations relating to countervailing duties S.2.1.1-4

prohibited subsidies: see export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3); subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II)

relationship with other agreements: see Agreement on Agriculture (AG), SCM Agreement and; specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1)

remedies: see remedies for actionable subsidies (SCM 7)

retroactivity T.5.1.1-2

serious prejudice (SCM 5(c)): see serious prejudice (SCM 6)

specific action against subsidy (SCM 32.1): see specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1)

standard of review, Declaration on Dispute Settlement Pursuant to the Agreement on Implementation of Art. VI of GATT 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement) or Part V of the SCM Agreement

legal effect A.3.63.1

standard of review, absence of provision for A.3.63.1

subsidy, definition (SCM 1.1): see subsidy, definition (SCM 1); subsidy, definition (SCM 1),

conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b))

sunset review (SCM 21.3): see sunset review (SCM 21.3)

“withdrawal of subsidy without delay” (SCM 4.7): see “withdrawal of subsidy without delay” (SCM 4.7)

scope of appellate review: see competence (AB)

security (bond or cash deposit) (GATT VI:2 and VI:3: Ad Note): see imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties (AD 9), security (bond or cash deposit) (GATT VI:2 and VI:3: Ad Note)

seek information or technical advice, panel’s right (DSU 13): see information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13)

separate opinion (AB/WP 3(2)/DSU 17.11)W.2.3A
serious damage or actual threat (ATC): see transitional safeguards (ATC 6)

serious injury: see determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements; safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX), conditions (SG 2); serious prejudice (SCM 6); transitional safeguards (ATC 6), serious damage or actual threat thereof (ATC 6(2)), Member’s determination of

serious prejudice (SCM 6)  

burden of proof S.2.19A.1

displacement of or impediment to exports (SCM 6.3(a)), “over an appropriately representative period” S.2.19B.4

evidence of, information submitted to or obtained by panel including information submitted under SCM Annex V S.2.19B.6.3-5

“market” S.2.19B.1.1-6

“in the same market” S.2.19B.1.4-6

“relevant market”, panel’s discretion to determine S.2.19B.1.1

pass-through of indirect subsidies and S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7

price suppression as effect of subsidy (SCM 6.3(c))

“effect of subsidy” (causal link) S.2.19B.5

determination of injury provisions (SCM 15) distinguished S.2.19B.5.3, S.2.25A.5

market insulation as a result of price-contingent subsidies S.2.19B.10.1-2

time limitation, whether S.2.19B.8

as evidence ipso facto of serious prejudice under SCM 5(c) S.2.19A.1-2

legal inferences drawn by panel (DSU 11) S.3.3.21-2

methodology for determining S.2.19B.4.1-2, S.2.19B.4.6, S.2.19B.5

“but for” test S.2.19B.5.7

magnitude of subsidy, relevance S.2.19B.6

panel’s discretion S.2.19B.1.1

relevant factors S.2.19B.5

order of analysis O.2.9, S.2.19A.1, S.2.19B.3.1, S.2.19B.4.4-5

price depression/suppression distinguished S.2.19B.4.1, S.2.19B.4.3

relevant market S.2.19B.1

relevant price S.2.19B.2

“significant” S.2.19B.4.1, S.2.19B.4.5-8

“suppression” O.2.9, S.2.19B.3.1

“resulted” (SCM 6.2) S.2.19B.8.3

subsidy programme and payments under, distinguishability R.4.1.29-30, S.2.19B.1

threat of S.2.19B.9.1

“service”: see GATS, applicability (GATS I)

services: see GATS, applicability (GATS I); MFN treatment (GATS II); national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1); national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4); national treatment, services and service suppliers (GATS XVII)

similar border measures other than ordinary customs duties” (AG 4.2, footnote 1): see measures requiring conversion into ordinary customs duties (AG 4.2), “similar border measures other than ordinary customs duties” (AG 4.2, footnote 1)

special or additional rules and procedures for dispute settlement (DSU 1.2 and Appendix 2)  

AD 13/footnote to AD 9, whether S.5.5

AD 17, whether A.3.55.1, S.5.1-4

conflict with DSU provisions, precedence in case of (WTO, Annex 1A) S.2.19C.2, S.5.2-4

 SCM 7.8 as S.2.19C.2

special safeguards (AG 5) A.1.14

c.i.f. import price (AG 5.1(b)) A.1.14.1, A.1.14.2

measures requiring conversion into ordinary customs duties (AG 4.2), relationship with A.1.14.3-4

specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.61, S.2.36

action under other relevant provisions of GATT 1994 distinguished (AD 18.1, footnote 24) A.3.61.2, A.3.61.4


accordance with provisions of GATT VI as interpreted by Anti-Dumping Agreement A.3.61.3, A.3.65.5-8

civil and criminal proceedings and penalties, whether A.3.65.7

security (bond or cash deposit) (GATT VI:2 and VI:3: Ad Note) as A.3.61.15

intention of dumping, relevance A.3.61.1

measure against dumping/subsidy A.3.61.5, A.3.61.11-13, S.2.36.1-2, S.2.36.6-8

adverse bearing J.3.61.11, S.2.36.6, T.6.2.18

design and structure of measure as evidence of protective application A.3.61.11-12, A.3.61.15, A.3.65.6, S.2.36.6-7

facilitation of exercise of WTO-consistent rights distinguished A.3.61.13, S.2.36.8

implications for conditions of competition, relevance A.3.61.12, S.2.36.7

measure specific to dumping/subsidy A.3.61.1-3, A.3.61.5-7, A.3.65.6

measure related to distinguished (AD 18.1 footnote 24/SCM 32.1 footnote 56) A.3.61.13, S.2.36.8

presence of constituent elements of dumping/subsidy A.3.61.1, A.3.61.7-9, S.2.36.4

as implied condition A.3.61.9-10

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2) T.6.3

AD “measure” qualifying for DSB proceedings (AD 17.4) A.3.56, L.1.6, R.2.1.3

acceptance of price undertakings L.1.6

definitive anti-dumping duty L.1.6

provisional measure (AD 7) A.3.38A.2, A.3.56, L.1.6

expired measure C.7.12-15, R.2.3.13-14, T.6.3.9-10, T.6.3.18

measure expiring during the proceedings T.6.3.17

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1) A.3.56.1-5, J.2.1.2, L.1.6, R.2.1.3-6, R.2.3, T.6.1.18-21

see also “matter referred to the DSB” (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1); request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2)

Addendum to request for consultations, relevance C.7.20, T.6.2.20

amendment of measure during proceedings D.2.2.17, R.2.3.9-10, R.2.3.18, T.6.3.5-6, T.6.3.16, T.6.3.17

challenge to system as a whole and J.2.1.23, R.2.2.24-5, T.6.2.22-3

due process right to defend oneself and D.2.2.1, D.2.2.7, J.2.1.1, R.2.1.1, R.2.1.6, R.2.3.16, T.6.1.1

identification of product, need for R.2.3.5-6, R.2.3.21

identity with the measures at issue at the consultation stage (DSU 4.4), relevance C.7.2, C.7.18, C.7.21-2, R.2.2.21-2, R.2.3.8, S.2.17.1, T.6.1.20

measure subsequent to date of request for consultations T.6.3.3

measure subsequent to establishment of panel [having the “same effect”] R.2.3.18-20, R.2.3.25, R.2.3.30, T.6.3.19-21

measures having “a bearing on compliance” R.2.5.2-6, R.4.1.19, T.6.3.18

objective and purpose of DSU 6.2 as test R.2.3.6

“practice” as measure R.2.3.17, T.6.3.8, T.6.3.12

“specific” R.2.3.27-9

“certain aspects of sunset review procedure”, sufficiency R.2.3.11, T.6.3.4

clear distinction between different claims, need for R.2.3.28

“included but not necessarily limited to” R.2.1.14, R.2.2.5, T.6.2.6

“total prohibition” R.2.3.16

means of compliance with DSB recommendation (DSB 19.1) distinguished I.0.5, P., R.2.3.24, T.6.3.15

measure actually applied, limitation to R.2.3.1, T.6.3.2

“measure” as basis of claim and as evidence distinguished E.3.1.9, P., R.2.3.27

“measures taken to comply” (DSU 21.5): see review of implementation of DSB

recommendations and rulings (DSU 21.5), “measures taken to comply” (including panel’s determination of WTO consistency)

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2), legal basis of claim distinguished, subsequent measures having the “same effect” R.2.3.19-20

“specific measure at issue” and legal basis of claim distinguished A.3.56.2

SPS Agreement  

see also harmonization of measures (SPS 3); sanitary and phytosanitary measures, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6); scientific evidence, need for sufficient (SPS 2.2)

arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, exclusion (SPS 2.3) S.6.4

appropriate level of protection and (SPS 5.5) S.6.4.1, S.6.15.1-2, S.6.16

alternative sources of discrimination S.6.4.1, S.6.17.3-4

as balance between promotion of international trade and protection of human, animal or plant life or health S.6.3.1, S.6.5.2

see also General Exceptions (GATT XX), measures necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health (GATT XX(b))

risk assessment (SPS 5.1) and S.6.9.1

basic rights and obligations (SPS 2), underlying nature of provision S.6.2.1, S.6.3.2, S.6.3.4-5


applicability to pre-existing situations and measures T.5.2.1

customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna

Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] and P.3.5.1

preamble as aid S.6.5.3, S.6.8.2

precautionary principle: see precautionary principle

SPS Agreement, Transparency of SPS Regulations (Annex B), publication of measures such
as laws, decrees or ordinances which are generally applicable (para. 1, footnote 5) P.5.4, S.6.24

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)  

see also appellate review (DSU 17), legal issues and interpretations, limitation to (DSU 17.6);

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6), completion of legal analysis; competence (panels); dumping/margin of dumping, definition/constituent elements (AD 2.1/GATT VI:1); information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13); judicial economy; panel reports, rationale, need for (DSU 12.7); standard/powers of review (safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX))

DSU 11 as applicable law S.7.1.8-9

applicability to Anti-Dumping Agreement subject to AD 17.6 S.7.1.1-3, S.7.1.8

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”)

see also evidence (admissibility and evaluation in panel proceedings) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3); order of analysis

acts of administration post-dating establishment of panel, right to consider E.3.1.9, E.3.1.11, E.3.2.18, P., S.7.6.3-4

assessment of legislation of complaining party, relevance G.4.4.5

discretion in selection of relevant evidence E.3.2.31-2, G.4.5.2, J.1.19, M.5.14, P., S.3.3.16, S.7.3.4, S.7.3.14

discretion to determine relevance E.3.2.6

discretion to select which evidence to refer to explicitly E.3.2.32, S.7.3.4, S.7.3.38, S.7.3.39-40

discretion/independence in evaluation of evidence B.3.2.23, E.3.2.3, E.3.2.9-14, E.3.2.19-23, E.3.2.26, E.3.2.28, M.5.14, S.3.3.15, S.3.3.19-20, S.3.3.23-4, S.7.2.16, S.7.3.5, S.7.3.6, S.7.3.12A, S.7.3.12B, S.7.3.16-18, S.7.3.21-2, S.7.3.26-7, S.7.3.32, S.7.3.33-8, S.7.3.47-8

egregious error, need for S.7.3.2, S.7.3.6, S.7.3.9, S.7.3.16

evidence available to investigating authority, limitation to S.7.6.2

evidence available to Member, limitation to E.3.1.4, S.7.6, T.7.2.2

evidence introduced at interim review, right to ignore (DSU 15) E.3.1.10, S.7.3.13

hypothetical evidence S.7.3.12

inferences based on circumstantial evidence, panel’s right to draw E.3.2.37

inferences that differ from party’s reasons for adducing evidence C.2.7

information not in record of investigation E.3.1.6-8, E.3.2.16, S.7.2.10-11

information in record of investigation but not referred to in determination E.3.1.5

insufficiency of evidence, relevance M.5.13, M.5.15, S.7.2.6, S.7.2.14, S.7.2A.6-7

legal characterization of facts and evaluation of evidence distinguished G.3.4A.5

as legal question S.7.3.11A

obligation to avoid misleading a priori assumptions E.3.2.27

obligation to examine and evaluate evidence M.5.13, S.6.13.7-8, S.7.2.15, S.7.2A.3-4, S.7.3.10, S.7.3.11

obligation to follow manner of assessment of investigating authority E.3.2.9-14, S.7.5.5

obligation to give reasoned and coherent treatment E.3.2.34, S.7.3.42

obligation to request information S.7.3.3

obligation to review whether risk assessment conclusions are reasonably based on scientific evidence S.6.9.10, S.6.20.8

obligation to support findings from evidence in panel record E.3.2.20, E.3.2.26, S.7.3.33

obligation to treat parties’ evidence consistently and even-handedly E.3.2.33, S.7.3.41

party’s obligation to argue relevance of evidence B.3.1.16, E.3.2.5, S.7.2A.2

party’s obligation to provide evidence to support its argument E.3.2.23, E.3.2.25, L.1.22

party’s obligation to raise panel’s alleged factual misunderstanding at interim review stage or appeal S.7.2A.8

reliance on translation subsequently disputed S.3.2.8, S.7.3.29

right to ask clarifying questions S.7.2.13-14

totality of evidence vs. individual evidentiary factors E.3.2.10-15, E.3.2.27, S.7.3.48

finding of non-justifiability in law, relevance S.7.3.30

“objective assessment of matter before it” C.5.3, E.3.1.1, E.3.2, S.7.2

see also evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel above; inferences from party’s refusal to provide information, panel’s right to draw

AD 17.6(i) compared S.7.1.6

AD 17.6(ii) compared A.3.60.3, S.7.1.7

all arguments, need to consider S.7.2.3, S.7.2.9

all facts, need to consider G.1.1.5

applicability of and conformity with relevant covered agreements E.3.2.1

customary international law, applicability S.7.2.1

applicable law

customary international law S.7.2.1

panel’s right to determine E.3.2.1

de minimis error S.7.2.18

de novo review of the facts, exclusion A.3.47.3, E.3.2.12, E.3.2.27, S.7.2.1, S.7.4.5-7, S.7.5

de novo review of risk assessment, exclusion S.7.8.1

discretion in deciding which legal issues to address C.4.26, G.4.5.2, J.1.19, S.7.2.7
error of law J.1.19

burden of proof / prima facie case, failure to apply correctly B.3.1.18, B.3.2.22, R.4.3.15-19, S.2.39.3-6

failure to apply proper standard of review S.4.18, S.7.4.6

failure to draw correct legal inferences (SCM 6.3(c)) S.3.3.21-2, S.7.3.44

failure to incorporate into conclusions all products referred to in terms of reference T.6.3.1

failure to make recommendation to resolve dispute J.1.20-1, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

failure to set out all matters considered G.4.2.2

factual and legal aspects, inclusion S.7.1.5, S.7.2.8

failure to analyse evidence P., S.3.2.7, S.7.3.28

failure to apply mandatory/discretionary legislation distinction in analysis M.1.7-9, S.7.3.31

failure to apply treaty provisions correctly R.4.1.25

failure to distinguish between existence of measure and its WTO-consistency L.1.19

failure to make objective assessment as abuse of discretion E.3.1.2

failure to use expert/scientific evidence in a balanced way S.4.15-18, S.7.2.20

findings in previous cases, relevance C.4.36, E.3.1.12

inter-dependent assumptions and O.2.5

mixed issues of fact and law, difficulty of distinguishing S.3.3.21, S.7.3.44

obligation to rule on parties’ SCM 3 claims J.1.21, S.2.19.4-5, S.7.7.2

party’s failure to address issues allegedly overlooked G.4.5.3

“reasoned and adequate” test

investigating authorities’ explanations A.3.47.3-4, A.3.50.3, E.3.2.6, E.3.2.12 n. 278, E.3.2.27, P.1.1.6, R.4.3.13, S.1.2.1-3, S.1.14.2, S.1.15.2, S.1.20.2, S.1.22.1-2, S.1.26.5, S.1.46.2-3, S.2.19B.5.10, S.7.3.43-5, S.7.4, S.7.5.1, S.7.5.3-4, S.7.5.7

risk assessment (SPS 5.1-5.3 and Annex A, para. 4) S.7.8.1-4

refusal of party to provide information and: see inferences from party’s refusal to provide information, panel’s right to draw

ultra petita finding on provision not before it S.7.2.4, S.7.2.6, T.6.2.18

relevant factors

evaluation of all relevant factors, need for S.7.4.2

provisions of covered agreements at issue S.7.4.7

“such other findings as will assist the DSB” (DSU 7.1/DSU 11) J.1.19-21, S.7.6

judicial economy and J.1.19, J.1.21, J.1.23, P.1.1.8, R.4.3.14, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

panel’s right to make alternative findings M.3.11

recommendation for DSB recommendation or ruling J.1.20-1, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6) A.3.58
assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.57.2, A.3.58.2-4, A.3.59

active review, need for S.7.1.6

de novo review, exclusion M.5.17

DSU 11 compared S.7.1.6

error, need to substantiate A.3.59.10

interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)) distinguished A.3.58.3, S.7.1.5

substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion A.3.58.5

“unbiased and objective” A.3.58.4-5, S.7.1.6

authorities’ establishment of facts (AD 17.6(i))

“establishment” A.3.59.1

“proper” A.3.58.4-5, A.3.59.1

determination of normative character of challenged “measure” A.3.62.4

discretionary powers A.3.59.9

“facts made available” (AD 17.5(ii))

AD 6.2 requirements, consistency with A.3.57.1, R.2.1.4

disclosure/discernibility to interested parties by time of final determination, relevance A.3.57.3-4

examination to be based on A.3.57.3-4

limitation to A.3.59.5-7

requirement to seek information, whether A.3.59.8

interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)) A.3.22.2, A.3.60

in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law A.7.40A.6, A.3.60.2, A.3.60.4-5, A.3.60.7, A.3.60.10-11, A.3.65.15, S.7.7.3

“admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.58.5, A.3.60, S.7.1.7, S.7.1.13, S.7.7.3

assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) and, cumulative effect A.3.58.4

DSU 11 compared S.7.1.7

objective assessment, relevance A.3.60.3-4, S.7.1.7

sequential analysis A.3.60.10-11

non-applicability to covered agreements other than Anti-Dumping Agreement including the SCM and SPS Agreements A.3.58.1, A.3.63.1-2, S.7.1.1, S.7.1.2, S.7.1.4

in case of simultaneous challenge under AD and SCM Agreements A.3.58.6, S.7.1.10-11

parties’ obligations (AD 17.5/17.6), AD 3.1 (determination of injury) distinguished A.3.57.2, A.3.58.2

standard/powers of review (safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX))

assessment of the facts

absence of facts S.1.31.4

de novo review of the facts, exclusion S.7.4.5, S.7.5.1

objective assessment of “reasoned and adequate” explanation, need for S.1.2.2-3, S.1.22.1-2, S.1.26.5-6, S.1.46.3, S.7.4.2, S.7.4.4-5, S.7.5.1

decrease in imports (SG 2.1) S.1.8.3

as preliminary to determination of causal link S.1.32.2

substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion S.1.2.1, S.7.4.5, S.7.5.1

DSU 11, applicability S.7.1.2-3, S.7.6.1

existence of right coupled with exercise of right in conformity with SG S.1.1.1, S.1.26.5

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7)  

see also amicus curiae briefs

enforcement of WTO rules as justification R.5.3

fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures L.1.10, M.1.7, M.6.1, P.3.1.13, P.3.7.2, R.5.2, R.5.4, R.5.6, R.5.9

good faith engagement in dispute settlement procedures (DSU 3.10) and R.5.5-6

legal interest, relevance R.5.1

Members of WTO, limitation to A.2.1.2, A.2.1.8

mutually agreed solutions: see mutually agreed solutions

obligation for panel to examine proprio motu, whether R.5.4

positive solution as aim R.2.3.20, R.2.5.6, S.3.4.1, S.3.4.5

self-regulating nature of provision R.5.2, R.5.4

“solution” M.6.1, R.5.9

State responsibility

acts or omissions of executive agency or executive branch L.1.4

countermeasures for breach of international obligations, proportionality and P.3.5.1, P.3.6.3, S.9.2

funding of export subsidy by private parties A.1.25.1

State trading enterprises (GATT XVII)

“adequate opportunity … to compete for participation in such purchases or sales” (GATT XVII:1(b)) S.7A.5

applicability to STEs of GATT provisions other than GATT XVII S.7A.1.3

prevention of discriminatory behaviour, limitation to S.7A.1.4

“commercial considerations” (GATT XVII:1(b)) S.7A.4

differential prices for commercial reasons, admissibility (GATT XVII:1, Ad Note) S.7A.2.1

insufficiency of GATT XVII:1 to prevent all obstacles to trade (GATT XVII:3) S.7A.6

obligation to comply with GATT principles of non-discriminatory treatment (GATT XVII:1(a)) S.7A.1

as anti-circumvention provision S.7A.1.1

discrimination and justifiable differentiation distinguished S.7A.1.2

GATT XVII:1(b) and S.7A.3

order of analysis O.2.8, S.7A.3.4-7

subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II)  

see also developing countries, special and differential treatment (SCM 27); export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3)

amount of subsidy, relevance S.2.2.4, S.2.25.1

“contingent upon export performance” (SCM 3.1(a)) A.1.4, A.1.38.12, S.2.12

see also export subsidy commitments (AG 9), “contingent on export performance” (AG 9.1(a))

burden of proof

de facto B.3.1.8

de jure B.3.1.8

export-orientation of recipient, relevance S.2.12.4

knowledge or expectation, sufficiency S.2.12.4

legislation, regulation or other legal instrument constituting measure as evidence of S.2.13.5

requirement to show proof of exportation, relevance A.1.4.3, A.1.16A.1, S.2.12.12

“contingent” S.2.12.1, S.2.12.8

eligibility of domestic users for payments under different conditions, relevance A.1.4.3, S.2.12.9, S.2.12.12

“in law or in fact” S.2.12.2-3

implied provision S.2.13.1

“in fact” S.2.14

“in law” S.2.13

“tied to” (SCM 3.1(a), footnote 4) S.2.12.2A, S.2.12.8, S.2.13.3-4

measure falling within AG 9 A.1.3.4, A.1.14C.1, A.1.17.4
subsidy available to property produced either within or outside subsidizing State S.2.12.4A, S.2.12.5-6, S.2.12.9-12

“contingent upon the use of domestic over imported products” (SCM 3.1(b)) S.2.15

“in law” S.2.15.1-2

implied provision S.2.15.1

“in law or in fact”, omission, relevance S.2.16

“except as provided in the Agreement on Agriculture” (SCM 3.1(a)) A.1.38.8, S.2.11

Agreement on Agriculture as primary test S.2.11.1

export credit guarantees, applicability to S.2.11.2

“except as provided in the Agreement on Agriculture” (SCM 3.1(b)) A.1.38.8, S.2.14A

Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I)

export credit guarantee or insurance (item (j)) S.2.9.10, S.2.39

access to government funds as test of profitability S.2.39.13

analysis of risk, relevance S.2.39.12

burden of proof B.3.1.20-1, S.2.39.10

as contextual guidance for analysis of AG 10.3 claims A.1.34.10, A.1.38.14, B.3.4.3

structure, design and operation of system, relevance B.3.1.21, S.2.19B.4.5, S.2.19B.4.5-7, S.2.19B.6.5, S.2.39.9-10, S.2.39.12-13

export credits at rates below actual cost of funds so employed (item (k)) A.1.20.7, S.2.40

“used to secure a material advantage” S.2.40.1-4

failure to cover long-term operating costs and losses (item (j)) A.1.20.7, S.2.39.2-7

remission or deferral of direct taxes (item (e)) S.2.37

burden of proof S.2.38.2

deferral not amounting to export subsidy (footnote 59) S.2.37.1

double taxation measures S.2.38

see also double taxation measures, justification (Illustrative List, SCM Annex I(item (e)), footnote 59)

national treatment and (GATT III:8(b)) S.2.42

subsidy, definition (SCM 1) A.3.61.8, S.2.36.3

see also countervailing duties (SCM, Part V), calculation of subsidy in terms of benefit to recipient (SCM 14); export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3); payments on export of agricultural product financed by virtue of governmental action (AG 9.1(c)), “financed”; subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II)

applicability “for purposes of this agreement” S.2.2.1-2, S.2.2.4

commonality of terminology in Agreement on Agriculture A.1.3.1-3

conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) A.1.3.1-3, S.2.9, S.2.29.1, S.2.30.1, S.2.60.1

“benefit” S.2.9.2, S.2.9.4, S.2.9.11

cost to government, relevance S.2.9.5

market test S.2.9.12

export credit guarantee S.2.9.10

payments to a funding mechanism or entrustment or direction to a private body (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(iv)) as distinct issue E.3.2.29

\privatization, relevance S.2.9.5, S.2.9.9, S.2.31.6-7


“an industry” (SCM 6.1(b)) S.2.9.7

“enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries” (SCM 2) S.2.9.7

“exporter or foreign producer” (SCM 11.2(ii)) S.2.9.7

“firm or industry” (SCM, Annex I) S.2.9.7

firms/owners, relevance of distinction S.2.9.6-8

group of persons S.2.9.7

“manufacture, production or export of any merchandise” (SCM 10, footnote 36) S.2.9.7, S.2.9.8

natural or legal person as S.2.9.3, S.2.9.7

need for S.2.9.1, S.2.9.3, S.2.9.6

“recipient firm” (SCM, Annex IV) S.2.9.7

“sources found to be subsidized” (SCM 19.3) S.2.9.7

review of need for continued imposition of countervailing duties (SCM 21.2) distinguished S.2.31.3

“direct subsidies, including payments-in-kind” (AG 9.1(a)), payment-in-kind A.1.15.1, A.1.17, A.1.22.1

financial contribution (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) A.1.3.1-3

direct transfer of funds (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) S.2.3.1-2, S.2.3A

“bestowed directly or indirectly” (SCM 10, footnote 36/GATT VI:3) S.2.9.7, S.2.43.1-3

exemption from or remission of internal taxes upon exportation (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(ii), footnote 1) S.2.5

forgoing of revenues otherwise due (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(ii)) A.1.3.1-3, S.2.3.1

“otherwise due” / basis of comparison (“but for” test) S.2.4

government measures not amounting to S.2.3.1 n. 35

payments to a funding mechanism or entrustment or direction to a private body (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(iv)) S.2.8

commercial reasonableness, relevance E.3.2.27, E.3.2.29

conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) as distinct issue E.3.2.29

contribution on commercially reasonable terms S.2.8.12

“directs” S.2.8.2-3, S.2.8.6-11

“entrusts” S.2.8.2-3, S.2.8.6-11

private party payments under the Agreement on Agriculture (AG 9.1(c)) distinguished A.1.25.3, S.2.8.1

provision of goods or services (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(iii)) S.2.1.2, S.2.3.1

“goods” S.2.1.2, S.2.6

government purchases S.2.3.1, S.2.6.1

“provision” S.2.7

severability of goods attached to land, relevance S.2.6.2-4

scope of SCM 1.1(a)(i)-(iii) distinguished S.2.8.4

transfer of economic resources from grantor to recipient for less than full consideration A.1.3.1, A.1.15.1, S.2.23.1

GATT VI:4/SCM 1.1(a)(1) and 3.1(a), interrelationship S.2.41.3

GATT VI:4/SCM 10 and 32.1, compatibility S.2.41.4, S.2.41.5

income or price support (SCM 1.1(a)(2)) S.2.3.1

non-exhaustive nature of AG 1(e) A.1.4.4, A.1.33A.3

obligations relating to subsidies distinguished S.2.2.3

pass-through of indirect input subsidy to countervailed product, need for (SCM 1.1/GATT VI:3) S.2.10, S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7.1, S.2.43

serious prejudice (SCM 5(c) and 6.3(c)) distinguished S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7

simultaneous fulfilment of all criteria, relevance S.2.7.2

“subsidy specific in accordance with the provisions of [SCM] Article 2” S.2.10A.1

sunset review (AD 11.3)

applicability of AD 2.1 (“dumping”) A.3.8, A.3.8.1, A.3.49.0, A.3.49.1

applicability of AD 2.4 (calculation of dumping margin) A.3.13.1, A.3.49.1-3

see also “likelihood” test, relevant factors, margins of dumping below

applicability of AD 3 (determination of injury) A.3.52B.1-4

applicability of AD 6 (evidence) A.3.51A.2, A.3.53.1-3

applicability of AD 9.4 (calculation of “all other” anti-dumping rate) A.3.40.1

causal link, need for A.3.46.4, A.3.47A.3, A.3.52A.5-7, A.3.65.11

collection of information post DSB ruling on original determination R.4.1.25

continuation of duty during review A.3.47A.2

as exception to mandatory rule A.3.45.1-2, A.3.45.4, A.3.47A.2

continuation order issued after establishment of DSU 21.5 compliance panel, panel’s right/obligation to consider R.4.0.7

cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) and A.3.21.5-6, A.3.48A

see also determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15), country by country analysis / cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.2)

applicability of AD 3.3 A.3.48A.3

implementation of recommendations and rulings of DSB (DSU 21)

effect of breach of AD 11.3 A.3.45.2, A.3.45.5-6

new evidentiary basis, investigating authorities’ right to adopt (AD 11.3/AD 11.4) A.3.45.6, A.3.51A.1-2, R.4.1.25, R.7.2.15, S.7.6.5

initiation before expiry of five years from imposition of duty A.3.45.1
investigatory/adjudicatory functions A.3.47.1, A.3.47.5, A.3.52.3

parties’ obligations A.3.52.3

proactive role of investigating authorities A.3.47.1, A.3.48A.4, A.3.52.3, A.3.52.12-13

“likelihood” test

continuance or recurrence of dumping A.3.8.1, A.3.45.1, A.3.46

company-specific basis determination of likelihood A.3.40.1, A.3.50.1-4, A.3.52.8, A.3.53.2

continuance or recurrence of injury A.3.45.1, S.2.32

“injury” (AD 3, footnote 9) A.3.52A.1

timeframe A.3.52A.9, A.3.52C.1-2

cumulative assessment A.3.48A.7

laws and regulations / legal instrument, need for E.3.2.25, L.1.22

“likelihood” A.3.47.2

likelihood-of-dumping and likelihood-of-injury tests, as separate inquiries A.3.52A.8

overall determination as basis A.3.52A.3-4

“positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.47.3-4, A.3.47.5, A.3.48A.4, A.3.52, A.3.52.9-14

absolute certainty, relevance E.3.1.10

presumptions, reliance on A.3.52, A.3.52.8, A.3.52.14

probability, need for A.3.40.1

relevant factors

factors other than margins of dumping / import volumes A.3.51.3, A.3.51.4

import volumes A.3.51.1-2

margins of dumping A.3.13.1, A.3.48.1-2, A.3.51.1-2

see also applicability of AD 2.4 (calculation of dumping margin) above

situation before and after anti-dumping duty order A.3.51.4

WTO-inconsistent methodology A.3.49.2-4, A.3.51.5

right to make A.3.51.1-2

threshold finding, relevance A.3.48A.5-6

methodology, absence of provision A.3.48.1, A.3.48.3, A.3.48.4, A.348A.5-6, A.3.50.1, A.3.52A.2

parties’ rights

full opportunity for defence of interests A.3.47A.1

“interested party” (AD 11.2) A.3.50.1

notice of process A.3.47A.1

reasons for determination A.3.47A.1

SCM Agreement, sunset review (SCM 21.3), identity of provisions A.3.63.3, I.3.3.1-2
time-limits (AD 11.4) A.3.47A.2

diligence, need for A.3.47A.2

sunset review (SCM 21.3)

burden/standard of proof

in case of “duly substantiated request” by domestic industry S.2.32.6

original investigation requirements (SCM 11 and 12) distinguished S.2.33, S.2.33.1

review on initiative of investigating authorities S.2.32.6-7

de minimis standard

absence of reference to, relevance I.3.3.1-2, S.2.21.2, S.2.32.2, S.2.32.5

termination of investigation provisions (SCM 11.9) distinguished S.2.21.1-3

time-bound limitation on countervailing duties (SCM 11.9) and I.3.10.11, S.2.31.5, S.2.32

original investigation requirements distinguished S.2.32.3-4, S.2.32.7, S.2.33

“likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of subsidization and injury” test (SCM 21.3) S.2.32

sunset review (AD 11.3), identity of provisions A.3.63.3, I.3.3.1-2

suspension of concessions (DSU 22) S.9

authorization, need for (DSU 3.7, 22.6 and 23.2(c)) R.0.2, S.9.1, S.9.3

as “available” (discretionary)measure S.9.10

level (DSU 22.4), proportionality, need for S.9.2

as temporary measure / termination on compliance with DSB recommendations or rulings (DSU 22.8) S.9.4, ARB.3.1.2

change of justification by non-complying Member, relevance T.6.4

continued application of authorized measure as “seeking of redress” R.0.2-3

“determination” of violation by Member (DSU 23.2(a)) R.0.6

DSB decision, circumstances requiring S.9.9

DSU 21.5 proceedings to resolve disagreement on compliance

automatic (ipso jure) termination of authorization on determination of compliance S.9.4

burden of proof B.3.5.2

continuance in absence of determination S.9.9

continuance of suspension during S.9.4

continued suspension as impairment of benefits (DSU 3.3) and R.0.6, S.9.4

pre-judgment of outcome S.9.8

DSU 22.8 conditions as alternatives S.9.5

good faith intentions and compliance distinguished B.3.5.1, P.3.1.18, R.4.3.2, S.9.5

interrelationship between DSU 22.8 and DSU 23 R.0.2

mutually agreed solution (DSU 3.7) and M.6.1, R.5.9

mutually satisfactory solution (DSU 22.8) and M.6.1, R.5.9, S.9.4

as ongoing action R.4.6.6

parties’ shared responsibility to bring about conditions allowing for termination of suspension S.9.4

early initiation of DSU 21.5 proceedings, desirability R.4.6.3, S.9.6

“removal” of inconsistent measure S.9.4

surveillance obligation (DSU 21.6/DSU 22.8) and R.0.6, S.9.4, S.9.9


Abbreviations used on this page