RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/AHG/W/5
25March 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1231)
Original: English Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
Ad-Hoc Group onImplementation
TOPIC 4*
Proposal byNew Zealand
Thefollowing communication, dated 24March 1997, hasbeen received from thePermanent
Mission ofNew Zealand.
_______________
“What might constitute “special circumstances ”inArticle 5.6oftheAgreement? ”
Article 5.1oftheAgreement provides that“aninvestigation todetermine theexistence, degree
andeffect ofanyalleged dumping shall beinitiated upon awritten application byoronbehalf ofthe
domestic industry ”except asprovided forinparagraph 6.Article 5.6provides thatif,inspecial
circumstances, theauthorities concerned decide toinitiate aninvestigation without having received
awritten application byoronbehalf ofadomestic industry, then they shall proceed only ifthey have
sufficient evidence ofdumping injury andacausal link, asdescribed inparagraph 2,tojustify the
initiation ofaninvestigation.
Articles 5.2to5.5oftheAgreement setouttheobligations oftheinvestigating authority relating
totheinitiation ofaninvestigation. Paragraph 2outlines theevidence tobeincluded inawritten
application with regard todumping, injury andcausal link; paragraph 3requires anexamination of
theaccuracyandadequacyoftheevidenceprovided;paragraph4setsoutthetestfordeterminingwhether
anapplication hasbeen made byoronbehalf ofanindustry; andparagraph 5deals with publicizing
oftheapplication.
Theintention ofArticle 5.6appears tobethatanauthority candecide toinitiate aninvestigation
without having received awritten application byoronbehalf ofadomestic industry. However the
paragraph provides thecaveat thatthere must be:
• special circumstances; and
• sufficient evidence ofdumping, injury andacausal link, asdescribed inparagraph
2,tojustify theinitiation ofaninvestigation.
Given that“special circumstances ”isnotfurther defined, thepurpose ofthispaper istoprovide a
basis fordiscussion about theconditions which might apply totheuseofthisprovision.
*Seedocument G/ADP/W/401 fordescriptions ofthenumbered topics.G/ADP/AHG/W/5
Page 2
Definition of“Special Circumstances ”
Intheabsence ofanydefinition intheAgreement, theplain meaning ofthewords according
toadictionary definition canbeauseful starting point.
Special ,asused inArticle 5.6canbedefined inthree ways according totheConcise Oxford
Dictionary. Itcanbe“ofaparticular kind, peculiar, notgeneral; foraparticular purpose; orespecial,
exceptional inamount, degree, intensity, etc”.
Circumstance issomewhat more straightforward being “time, place, manner, cause, occasion,
etc., surroundings, ofanactorevent; external conditions affecting orthatmight affect action ”.
ANew Zealand Court hasdefined special circumstances as“facts peculiar tothecasesetting
itapart from others. Special means something lessthan extraordinary orunique... ”
What Conditions Could Lead totheUseofArticle 5.6?
Inconsidering theconditions which might permit theuseofArticle 5.6,itisnecessary toanalyse
themeaning ofthetext. Ineffect, itmeans thatauthorities mayinitiate aninvestigation without having
received awritten application byoronbehalf ofanindustry, butdoes require thatinitiation bebased
onthesufficiency oftheevidence required byparagraph 2.Theconsequences would appear tobe
first, thatanindustry need notmake awritten application assuch; andsecond, thattherequirement
thattheapplication bemade byoronbehalf ofadomestic industry isexcused, andinparticular that
thedetermination required byparagraph 4ofArticle 5need notbemade. Ineffect, therefore, the
issue becomes oneofdeciding upon theexceptional circumstances which would justify theauthorities
waiving therequirement thatawritten application bemade byoronbehalf ofanindustry andthat
aminimum level ofsupport bytheindustry bedetermined.
Exceptional orspecial circumstances relating tothelodging ofawritten application ortothe
determination thatanapplication hasbeen made byorbehalf ofanindustry could arise inrelation to:
• Difficulties inascertaining thelevel ofsupport foranapplication, e.g.because there
arealarge number ofproducers inanindustry;
• Difficulties relating totheavailability ofinformation toanindustry, e.g.theindustry
itself might nothave access toinformation;
• Difficulties relating tothelodging ofanapplication byanindustry, e.g. because
producers have concerns about thecommercial consequences ofmaking anapplication;
Thesituation where there isafragmented industry involving alarge number ofproducers is
covered byFootnote 13,which provides forthedetermination ofsupport byuseofstatistically valid
sampling methods. This would suggest thatafragmented industry oralarge number ofproducers
cannot beregarded asaspecial circumstance because ithasbeen envisaged anddealt with through
thestandard process provided forinArticle 5.4. There maybeother circumstances, such asdifficulties
inidentifying orcontacting producers, which make itdifficult toascertain levels ofsupport, butthe
extent towhich they could beregarded asbeing exceptional rather than, say,time-consuming, needs
tobecarefully considered. Another possible area ofdifficulty arises with theidentification ofalike
product produced byadomestic industry, andwhether, forexample, Article 5.6might beused where
anaffected industry ’sproduct isprocessed intoalikeproduct (although itisnotpossible totakeaction
consistent with theAgreement where dumping ofaproduct isnotcausing injury toproducers oflike
goods).G/ADP/AHG/W/5
Page 3
Insome cases, anindustry could argue thatitdoes nothave information “reasonably available ”
toitinterms ofArticle 5.2, which would meet therequirements forinitiation under Article 5.1.
However, information available togovernment agencies might besufficient tomeet those requirements.
This turns onwhat might beregarded as“reasonably available ”,andwhether intheabsence of
information which isreasonably available toanapplicant industry itisappropriate fortheinvestigating
authorities orsome other agency toassemble andconsider theinformation provided forinArticle 5.2.
Concern about commercial consequences ofanapplication canarise, forexample inasmall
economy where importers arealso significant customers ofadomestic industry, andlodging an
application could leadthese importers tothreaten nottopurchase product from theindustry. Insuch
acircumstance, itmay beappropriate tosafeguard theposition ofthedomestic industry byusing
Article 5.6. However, given thatitisstillnecessary tobase adecision toinitiate aninvestigation on
theinformation referred toinArticle 5.2,which includes information relating toproducers, itisunlikely
thatsuch anapproach would effectively insulate theproducers from anyaction bytheir customers.
Inanyevent, theinvestigating authorities should stillascertain thatanapplication hasthenecessary
degree ofsupport interms ofArticle 5.4,andtheissue maybemore oneofmaintaining confidentiality
ofinformation under Article 6.5than applying theexception ofArticle 5.6.
Concerns about confidentiality ofinformation between producers inanindustry could mean
thatanadministering authority may have to,ineffect, actastheassembly point forinformation from
anumber ofindividual producers, which taken together makes uptheapplication. Technically, this
would mean thatanapplication persehasnotbeen made byoronbehalf ofanindustry. However,
forthereasons outlined above, thisdoes notmean thattherequirement todetermine standing canbe
ignored.
There willbeother possible scenarios forwhat might constitute “special circumstances ”in
terms ofArticle 5.6,andthequestion arises whether there might besome consistent approach tothe
consideration ofsuch scenarios. One such approach could betoconsider whether ornotthere are
other provisions intheagreement which could deal with thesituation, such asthespecific footnote
reference tofragmented industries, ortheconfidentiality provisions ofArticle 6referred toabove.
Theelaboration ofpossible guidelines inresponse tothisquestion would beauseful areafordiscussion
bytheAdHoc Group.