Market access

On 7 November 2001 Brazil requested consultations with Argentina in respect of the definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by Argentina on imports of poultry from Brazil classified under Mercosur tariff line 0207.11.00 and 0207.12.00. These measures were adopted by the Ministry of Economy of Argentina in Resolution 574 from 21 July 2000 published in the Argentinean Official Gazette on 24 July 2000. Brazil considered that the definitive anti-dumping duties imposed as well as the investigation conducted by the Argentinean Authorities might have been flawed and based on erroneous or deficient procedures inconsistent with Argentina’s obligations under Articles 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 12 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement Article VI of the GATT 1994 and Articles 1 and 7 of the Customs Valuation Agreement.

Le 18 mai 2015 l’Organe d’appel de l’OMC a publié son “rapport sur la mise en conformité” dans l’affaire États-Unis — Certaines prescriptions en matière d’étiquetage indiquant le pays d’origine (EPO) (WT/DS384/386). Dans ce différend les plaignants étaient le Canada et le Mexique.

On 2 November 2005 the United States requested consultations with Turkey concerning the latter’s import restrictions on rice from the United States. According to the request Turkey requires an import license to import rice but fails to grant such licenses to import rice at Turkey’s bound rate of duty. According to the request Turkey also operates a tariff-rate quota for rice imports requiring that in order to import specified quantities of rice at reduced tariff levels importers must purchase specified quantities of domestic rice including from the Turkish Grain Board (TMO) Turkish producers or producer associations (“the domestic purchase requirement”). The request lists more than ten measures through which Turkey has allegedly maintained the foregoing restrictions on rice imports including Decree No. 96/7794 related to the General Assessment of the Regime Regarding Technical Regulations and Standardization for Foreign Trade (Official Gazette No. 22541 1 February 1996 Repeated).

El 31 de octubre de 2005 la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Leyes reglamentos y metodología para el cálculo de los márgenes de dumping (“reducción a cero”)”.

On 30 January 2002 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the final determinations of both the United States Department of Commerce (DOC) and the United States International Trade Commission in the full sunset review of the anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Japan. These determinations were issued on 2 August 2000 and 21 November 2000 respectively. Japan claimed that these determinations were erroneous and based on deficient rulings procedures and provisions pertaining to the United States Tariff Act of 1930 as amended (“the Act”) and related regulations. Japan further claimed that the procedures and provisions of the Act and related regulations as well as the above determinations were inconsistent with inter alia Articles VI and X of GATT 1994; Articles 2 3 5 6 (including Annex II) 11 12 and 18.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement.

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 06 juin 2005 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Mexique - Mesures antidumping définitives visant la viande de bœuf et le riz”.

On 21 August 2012 Japan requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods. Japan challenges: (i) the requirement to present for approval of a non-automatic import licence: Declaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación (DJAI); (ii) non-automatic licences required in the form of Certificados de Importación (CIs) for the importation of certain goods; (iii) requirements imposed on importers to undertake certain trade-restrictive commitments; and (iv) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or refusal to grant such approval or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade-restrictive commitments.

On 10 February 1999 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 15 U.S.C. 72 (1994) (“US 1916 Act”). Japan alleged that the US 1916 Act stipulates that the importation or sale of imported goods within the US market in certain circumstances is unlawful constituting a criminal offence and inviting civil liability. Japan further alleged that judicial decisions under the US 1916 Act are made without the procedural safeguards provided for in the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Japan stated that a court action had been brought under the US 1916 Act against affiliates of Japanese companies. Japan contended that the US 1916 Act is inconsistent with Articles III VI and XI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

Le 7 juillet 2014 l’Organe d’appel de l’OMC a publié son rapport sur le différend “États-Unis — Mesures compensatoires et mesures antidumping visant certains produits en provenance de Chine” (DS449).