. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/LTU/3
G/SCM/Q1/LTU/3
7 October 2002
(02-5372)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal: Spanish
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Question Posed by MEXICO Regarding
the Notification of LITHUANIA1
The following communication, dated 3 October 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Mexico.
_______________
Mexico wishes to pose the following questions to the Government of Lithuania regarding the
notification of the "Anti-Dumping Law of the Republ ic of Lithuania" (Law on the Amendment of the
Anti-Dumping Law of the Republic of Lithuania adopting the new version of the law, No. IX-663)
adopted on 17 December 2001 and circulated in document G/ADP/N/1/LTU/1 dated 2 May 2002.
Articles 2.7 and 2.8:   The meaning of the expression "price payable" needs to be clarified
and illustrated given that the normal value and export price should be determined on transactions
made during the period under investigation.
Article 2.17:  Could the definition of an importer as a natural or legal person who "has
concluded any other contract for the supply of such products" be interpreted as including a natural or
legal person who has not made any imports, but who could do so under a supply contract?  Could
Lithuania clarify what is meant by "has concluded any other contract for the supply of such
products"?
Article 4.1:   What are the implications of there being two different times at which a normal
value may be established?  Does it follow that these two normal values can be the same, or must they
differ?
Article 4.4:   Are the criteria of the constructed value and export price to a third country when
there are no sales of the like product in the ordinary course of trade applied successively and
exclusively?
Article 4.6 and 4.7:   Article 2.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement provides for cases of
"association or a compensatory arrangement between the exporter and the importer or a third party"
for the purpose of calculating the export price.  On what grounds does Lithuania intend to apply these
concepts for calculating the normal value?  Could they be interpreted as options additional to those set
forth in the Anti-Dumping Agreement for the purpose of calculating the normal value?
                                                     
1 G/ADP/N/1/LTU/1.G/ADP/Q1/LTU/3
G/SCM/Q1/LTU/3
Page 2
Article 4.19:   The matter of the notification of interested parties of the selection of the third
country prompts the following questions:  When an d how are the parties notified of the decision to
conduct the anti-dumping investigation?  Where and how is the effective date of this decision
determined? How does Lithuania apply the meaning of "shortly", that is to say, within what time-
limit?  Could the Lithuanian authority give an example of such a case?
Article 4.20:   Why is there no notification similar to that provided for in Article 4.19 of the
selection of a third country other than the one selected for the initial investigation?
Article 4.22:   Is public notice given of the determination of whether the producer operates
under market-economy conditions?  Could Lithuania clarify what the phrase "having given theinterested parties an opportunity to comment" re fers to and when the parties are given such an
opportunity?
Article 8.7 (2):   On what grounds does Lithuania consider that 80 per cent of domestic
production of the like product is sufficient to comply with the final part of Article 4.1(ii) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, which states that injury must be being caused to almost all domestic
production?
Article 12.1:  What is the time-limit set by the Institution for the applicant to rectify the
shortcomings in its application?  If it is established on a case-by-case basis, what are the criteriaforming the basis for the decision?
Article 13.1:   Do the 45 calendar days from the receipt of the application for making the
decision on whether or not to initiate the investigation include the time-limit referred to in the above
question?
Article 16.3 (1):  What type of contracts are being referred to with regard to limiting the
examination in an investigation?  Please explain how such contracts would be considered for the
purpose of limiting the examination.
Article 16.4:   Is this a three-week time-limit for the interested parties to make their
information available or for the Institution to c hoose the sample once such information has been
submitted?
Article 18.2:   Does Lithuania consider it appropriate to initiate an investigation into a like
product when the imports thereof are already subject to provisional or definitive anti-dumping duties?
On what grounds?
Article 36.2:  Do the imposed anti-dumping duties cease to be considered circumvented if
any of the conditions in either paragraph 1 or paragraph 2 are not met?
__________