WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/ARM/3 
G/SCM/Q1/ARM/3 27 February 2004 
 
 
(04-0898) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Original:   English 
 
 
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS 
 
Replies to Questions Posed by the EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
1 
Regarding the Notification of ARMENIA2 
  
 The following communication has been receive d from the WTO Notification Agency in the 
Republic of Armenia. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Q1. Could Armenia confirm that Article 8(1)(b) of the Anti-Dumping Law allows the use of 
a comparable price of the like product when exported to a third country only provided that this 
price is representative, in accordance with Arti cle 2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA)?  
 
Reply
 
  Armenia confirms that Article 8 (1) (b) of  the Anti-Dumping Law allows the use of a 
comparable price of the like product when exported to a third country only provided that this price is 
representative, in accordance with Article 2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA). 
 
Q2. Does it follow from Article 30 of the Anti -Dumping Law that dumped imports from one 
country can be cumulated with subsidised imports from another country in the same 
investigation?   
Reply
 
  Article 30 of the Anti-Dumping Law allows th e cumulative assessment of imports only if:   
 
(1)  the amount of dumping and/or countervailable subsidies established in relation to the imports 
from each country is more than de minimis  and that the volume of imports from each country is 
not negligible as specified in Article 36 of this law;  
   (2)  a cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports is appropriate in the light of the conditions 
of competition between the im ported products and the conditions  of competition between the 
imported products and th e like Armenian product. 
 
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/Q1/ARM/1-G/SCM/Q1/ARM/1 
2 G/ADP/N/1/ARM/1- G/SCM/N/1/ARM/1 G/ADP/Q1/ARM/3 
G/SCM/Q1/ARM/3 Page 2 
 
 
 Q3. Please clarify under which circumstances Armenia would find it appropriate to select an 
investigation period shorter than three years for th e injury investigation (Article 40 of the Anti-
Dumping Law). 
 Reply
 
  Armenia will find appropriate to select an inv estigation period shorter than three years if:  
 
• the margin of dumping is much more than de minimis  margin of dumping, 
• there is a rapid growth of volumes of imports.   
 Q4. Article 41(3) of the Anti-Dumping Law provides that the Authorized Body shall 
consider information submitted by interested pa rties unless such consideration would be unduly 
burdensome to the Authorized Body of disrupt the timely progress of the investigation.  Please 
clarify under what circumstances Armenia would consider the consideration of information to 
be “unduly burdensome”. 
 
Reply
 
  Armenia will find the consideration of inform ation to be “unduly burdensome” if the number 
of interested parties and the volume of submitted in formation are so large that prevent the conduction 
of the investigation in accordance with time period defined by the Law.    
 
Q5. Pursuant to Article 41(10) of the Anti-Dumping Law copies of documents requested 
from the interested parties have to be certified by a notary in the country of export.  Would 
Armenia consider that such condition is necessary and proportionate for the purpose of conducting anti-dumping investigat ions in accordance with the ADA? 
 
Reply
 
  Armenia finds that the copies of documents requ ested from the interested parties have to be 
certified by a notary in the country of export in order to ensure the authenticity of submitted 
documents.    
 
Q6. Could Armenia please clarify whether it applies the so-called “lesser-duty rule”?  If this 
is not the case, please explain how the maximum duration of provisional measures laid down in 
Article 51(7) of the Anti-Dumping Law is consistent with Article 7.4 of the ADA. 
 Reply
 
  Armenia applies “lesser-duty rule”.    
Q7. Article 72, paragraph 6 provides that the Authorized Body shall disregard information 
if confidential treatment is not warranted and the supplier of the information is unwilling to 
make it public.  Would the Authorized Body nev ertheless use such information if it can be 
demonstrated from appropriate sources that th e information is correct, in accordance with 
Article 6.5.2 ADA? 
  G/ADP/Q1/ARM/3 
 G/SCM/Q1/ARM/3 
 Page 3 
 
 
 Reply  
  The Authorized Body will use the informati on if it can be demonstrated from appropriate 
sources that the information is correct.  
 
__________