Dispute settlement

On 27 September 2002 Australia and Brazil requested consultations with the European Communities concerning the export subsidies provided by the EC in the framework of its Common Organisation of the Market for the sugar sector. The requests concerned Council Regulation (EC) No. 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the EC’s common organization of the markets in the sugar sector and all other legislation regulations administrative policies and other instruments relating to the EC regime for sugar and sugar containing products including the rules adopted pursuant to the procedure referred to in Article 42(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1260/2001 and any other provision related thereto. On 14 March 2003 Thailand requested consultations with the European Communities on the same matter.

On 8 May 1998 the US requested consultations with Mexico in respect of an anti-dumping investigation of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) grades 42 and 55 from the US conducted by Mexico. The US alleged that on 27 February 1997 the Government of Mexico published a notice initiating this anti-dumping investigation on the basis of an application dated 14 January 1997 from the Mexican National Chamber of Sugar and Alcohol Producers. The US further alleged that on 23 January 1998 Mexico issued a notice of final determination of dumping and injury in that investigation and consequently imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on these imports from the United States. The US contended that the manner in which the application for an anti-dumping investigation was made as well as the manner in which a determination of threat of injury was made is inconsistent with Articles 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 and 12 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 6 November 2000 Turkey requested consultations with Egypt concerning an anti-dumping investigation by the Egyptian Ministry of Trade and Supply with respect to imports of rebar from Turkey. The investigation was completed and the final report released on 21 October 1999. As a result of the investigation anti-dumping duties were imposed ranging from 22.63-61.00 per cent ad valorem. Turkey considered that: Egypt made determinations of injury and dumping in that investigation without a proper establishment of the facts and based on an evaluation of the facts that was neither unbiased nor objective; during the investigation of material injury or threat thereof and the causal link Egypt acted inconsistently with Articles 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 6.1 and 6.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and during the investigation of sales at less than normal value Egypt violated Article X:3 of the GATT 1994 as well as Articles 2.2 2.4 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.7 and 6.8 and Annex II Paragraphs 1 3 5 6 and 7 and Annex I Paragraph 7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 5 October 1995 Canada requested consultations with Australia in respect of Australia’s prohibition of imports of salmon from Canada based on a quarantine regulation. Canada alleged that the prohibition is inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 and also inconsistent with the SPS Agreement.

On 8 October 1997 the United States requested consultations with Canada in respect of export subsidies allegedly granted by Canada on dairy products and the administration by Canada of the tariff-rate quota on milk. The United States contended that these export subsidies by Canada distort markets for dairy products and adversely affect US sales of dairy products. The United States alleged violations of Articles II X and X1 of the GATT 1994 Articles 3 4 8 9 and 10 of the Agreement on Agriculture Article 3 of the SCM Agreement and Articles 1 2 and 3 of the Import Licensing Agreement.

Le 15 septembre 2020 l’OMC a distribué le rapport du Groupe spécial sur l’affaire introduite par la Chine “États-Unis — Mesures tarifaires visant certains produits en provenance de Chine” (DS543).

On 18 June 2013 Panama requested consultations with Colombia with respect to the imposition by Colombia of a compound tariff affecting the importation of textiles apparel and footwear from Panama. The measure at issue is a compound tariff that Colombia has allegedly imposed by Presidential Decree No. 074 of 23 January 2013 (Decree 074/2013). Panama claims that this measure at issue is contained in: - Decree 074/2013; - Decree 1497/2011 as regards the definition of the products covered by the nomenclature of Chapters 61 62 63 and 64 of the Tariff Schedule; and - Memorandum No. 000165 of 30 April 2013 from the Customs Management Department of the Directorate of National Taxes and Customs on “measures to control compliance with Decree 074 of 2013”.

El 22 de octubre de 1999 el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Turquía - Restricciones aplicadas a las importaciones de productos textiles y prendas de vestir”.

On 1 June 1999 the US requested consultations with the EC in respect of the alleged lack of protection of trademarks and geographical indications (GIs) for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the EC. The US contended that EC Regulation 2081/92 as amended does not provide national treatment with respect to geographical indications and does not provide sufficient protection to pre-existing trademarks that are similar or identical to a geographical indication. The US considered this situation to be inconsistent with the EC’s obligations under the TRIPS Agreement including but not necessarily limited to Articles 3 16 24 63 and 65 of the TRIPS Agreement...

Le 13 novembre 2006 l’Organe d’appel a remis sont rapport au sujet de la plainte des États-Unis visant les Communautés européennes dans le différend “Communautés européennes — Certaines questions douanières” (WT/DS315/AB/R).