Dispute settlement

Le 10 août l’OMC a distribué le rapport du Groupe spécial concernant la procédure engagée par la Fédération de Russie dans l’affaire “Union européenne et ses États membres — Certaines mesures relatives au secteur de l’énergie” (DS476).

On 30 June 1998 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of the alleged imposition of countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel (leaded bars) from the UK. The EC asserted that the US imposed countervailing duties of 1.69 per cent on United Engineering Steels Ltd (UES) for the review period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994 and of 2.4 per cent for the review period 1 January 1995 to 20 March 1995 on the basis of subsidies which had been granted to British Steel Corporation (BSC). The EC also contended that the US imposed countervailing duties on British Steel plc (BSplc) / British Steel Engineering Steels LTD (BSES) for the review period 1 January 1996 to 31 December 1996 on the basis of subsidies granted to BSC before its privatization in 1988. The EC alleged that these impositions of countervailing duties constitute a violation of Articles 1.1(b) 10 14 and 19.4 of the Subsidies Agreement.

On 7 April 1997 the US requested consultations with Japan in respect of the latter’s prohibition under quarantine measures of imports of certain agricultural products. The US alleged that Japan prohibits the importation of each variety of a product requiring quarantine treatment until the quarantine treatment has been tested for that variety even if the treatment has proved to be effective for other varieties of the same product. The US alleged violations of Articles 2 5 and 8 of the SPS Agreement Article XI of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. In addition the US made a claim for nullification and impairment of benefits.

On 22 March 2018 the WTO Appellate Body issued its report in the case “Russia — Anti-Dumping Duties on Light Commercial Vehicles from Germany and Italy.

Le 05 mai 2000 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Canada - Durée de la protection conférée par un brevet”.

Complaints by the United States. These are in respect of the alleged reclassification by the European Communities for tariff purposes of certain Local Area Network (LAN) adapter equipment and personal computers with multimedia capability. The US alleged that these measures violate Article II of GATT 1994.

On 21 September 2004 the United States requested consultations with the European Communities concerning the Communities’ administration of laws and regulations pertaining to the classification and valuation of products for customs purposes and its failure to institute tribunals or procedures for the prompt review and correction of administrative action on customs matters.

El 22 de febrero de 1999 el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Japón - Medidas que afectan a los productos agropecuarios”.

On 20 December 2012 Japan requested consultations with China pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the DSU Article XXII:1 of the GATT 1994 and Articles 17.2 and 17.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement with respect to the measures and claims set out below. On 13 June 2013 the European Union requested consultations with China pursuant to the same above-mentioned provisions and with respect to the measures and claims set out below. In both complaints the consultations concerned China's measures imposing anti-dumping duties on certain HP-SSST from Japan and the European Union respectively as set forth in MOFCOM's Preliminary Determination notice and MOFCOM's Final Determination notice including any and all annexes and any amendments thereof.

Le 28 septembre 2007 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial de la mise en conformité concernant l’affaire “Corée — Droits antidumping sur les importations de certains papiers en provenance d’Indonésie” (DS312).

Le 20 septembre 2006 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Mesures relatives à la réduction à zéro et aux réexamens à l’extinction”.

Le 03 décembre 2007 l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Brésil - Mesures visant l’importation de pneumatiques rechapés”.

El 16 de enero de 1998 el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Communidades Europeas - Medidas queafectan a la carne y los productos cárnicos (hormonas)”.

El 09 de abril de 1999 la OMC hizo público el informe arbitral sobre el caso “Communidades Europeas - Régimen de la importación venta y distribución de bananos”.

Le 03 mai 2002 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Chili - Système des fourchettes de prix et mesures de sauvegarde appliquées à certains produits agricoles”.

El 25 de abril de 2005 el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “República Dominicana - Medidas que afectan a la importación y venta interna de cigarrillos”.

On 24 October 2008 Mexico requested consultations with the United States with respect to the following measures: (i) the United States Code Title 16 Section 1385 (“Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act”) (ii) the Code of Federal Regulations Title 50 Section 216.91 (“Dolphin–safe labeling standards”) and Section 216.92 (“Dolphin–safe requirements for tuna harvested in the ETP [Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean] by large purse seine vessels”) and (iii) the ruling in Earth Island Institute v. Hogarth 494 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 2007).

Le 17 juin 2011 l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport dans l’affaire Thaïlande — Mesures douanières et fiscales visant les cigarettes en provenance des Philippines (WT/DS371/AB/R).

On 7 February 2008 the Philippines requested consultations with Thailand concerning a number of Thai fiscal and customs measures affecting cigarettes from the Philippines. Such measures include Thailand's customs valuation practices excise tax health tax TV tax VAT regime retail licensing requirements and import guarantees imposed upon cigarette importers. The Philippines claims that Thailand administers these measures in a partial and unreasonable manner and thereby violates Article X:3(a) of the GATT 1994.

On 12 August 1997 the EC requested consultations with Korea in respect of a definitive safeguard measure imposed by Korea on imports of certain dairy products. The EC contended that under the provisions of different governmental measures Korea has imposed a safeguard measure in the form of an import quota on imports of certain dairy products. The EC considered that this measure is in violation of Articles 2 4 5 and 12 of the Agreement on Safeguard Measures as well as a violation of Article XIX of GATT 1994.

Le 11 juillet 1996 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Japon - Taxes sur les boissons alcooliques”.

On 11 May 2017 the WTO Appellate Body issued its report in the case “United States - Certain Methodologies and their Application To Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China”.

El 15 de julio de 2002 la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Artículo 129(c)(1) de la Ley de los Acuerdos de la Ronda Uruguay”.

On 4 March 1999 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of the US decision effective as of 3 March 1999 to withhold liquidation on imports from the EC of a series of products together valued at over $500 million on an annual basis and to impose a contingent liability for 100% duties on each individual importation of affected products. On 2 March 1999 the arbitrators charged with determining the level of suspension of concessions requested by the United States in response to the failure by the EC to implement the recommendations of the DSB in respect of the EC’s banana regime (WT/DS27) had asked for additional data from the parties and informed the parties that they were unable to issue their report within the 60-day period envisaged by the DSU. The EC contends that the measure made effective by the US as of 3 March 1999 deprives EC imports into the United States of the products in question of the right to a duty not in excess of the rate bound in the US Schedule. The EC further contended that by requiring the deposit of a bond to cover the contingent liability for 100% duties US Customs effectively impose 100% duties on each individual importation. The EC alleged violations of Articles 3 21 22 and 23 of the DSU and Articles I II VIII and XI of GATT 1994. The EC also alleged nullification and impairment of benefits under GATT 1994 as well as the impediment of the objectives of the DSU and GATT 1994. The EC had requested urgent consultations pursuant to Article 4.8 of the DSU.

On 4 March 1999 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of the US decision effective as of 3 March 1999 to withhold liquidation on imports from the EC of a series of products together valued at over $500 million on an annual basis and to impose a contingent liability for 100% duties on each individual importation of affected products. On 2 March 1999 the arbitrators charged with determining the level of suspension of concessions requested by the United States in response to the failure by the EC to implement the recommendations of the DSB in respect of the EC’s banana regime (WT/DS27) had asked for additional data from the parties and informed the parties that they were unable to issue their report within the 60-day period envisaged by the DSU. The EC contends that the measure made effective by the US as of 3 March 1999 deprives EC imports into the United States of the products in question of the right to a duty not in excess of the rate bound in the US Schedule. The EC further contended that by requiring the deposit of a bond to cover the contingent liability for 100% duties US Customs effectively impose 100% duties on each individual importation. The EC alleged violations of Articles 3 21 22 and 23 of the DSU and Articles I II VIII and XI of GATT 1994. The EC also alleged nullification and impairment of benefits under GATT 1994 as well as the impediment of the objectives of the DSU and GATT 1994. The EC had requested urgent consultations pursuant to Article 4.8 of the DSU.