WT/DS479/2  
 
16 September 2014  
(14-5193)  Page: 1/2  
  Original: English  
 
 RUSSIA – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON LIGHT COMMERCIAL VEHICLES 
FROM GERMANY AND ITALY 
REQUEST FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PANEL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION 
The following communication, dated 15 Septem ber 2014, from the delegation of the 
European Union to the Chairperson of the Disput e Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to 
Article 6.2 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
  
On 21 May 2014, the European Union requested cons ultations with the Government of the Russian 
Federation ("Russia") pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures 
Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), and Articles 17.2 and 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation 
of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("AD Agreement") with respect to 
the levy of anti-dumping duties on light commerc ial vehicles ("LCVs") from Germany and Italy by 
Russia pursuant to Decision No. 113 of 14 May 2013 of the College of the Eurasian Economic 
Commission ("EAEC"), as set forth therein, including any and all annexes, notices and reports of the Department for the Protection of the Internal Market of the EAEC, and any amendments thereof.
1 
The European Union held consultations with Russia on 18 June 2014. These consultations did not 
resolve the dispute. 
The European Union considers that the measures at issue are inconsistent with Russia's obligations 
under the following provisions of the WTO Agreements: 
1. Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 of the AD Ag reement, because, by selecting non-consecutive 
periods of non-equal duration for the examination of the trends for the whole domestic industry, 
Russia's injury determination was not based on an objective examination of positive evidence. 
2. Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the AD Agreement, because Russia failed to consider whether there 
has been a significant increase in dumped imports for the whole investigation period based on an objective examination of positive evidence; and be cause Russia failed to demonstrate based on an 
objective examination of positive evidence that the effect of the allegedly dumped imports was to 
prevent domestic price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree.  
3. Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the AD Agreement, because Russia failed to conduct an objective 
examination, based on positive evidence, of the relevant economic factors and indices having a 
bearing on the state of the industry, and therefor e improperly found that the domestic industry 
suffered material injury. 
4. Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the AD Agreement, because Russia failed to conduct an objective 
examination, based on positive evidence, of th e causal relationship between the imports under 
investigation and the alleged injury to the domestic industry. Russia also failed to conduct an objective examination, based on positive evid ence, of factors other than the imports under 
                                               
1 WT/DS479/1. WT/DS479/2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  investigation which have been injuring the domestic industry, and therefore improperly attributed 
the injuries caused by these other factors to the imports under investigation.  
5. Article 3.1 and Article 4.1 of the AD Agreement, because Russia incorrectly defined the 
domestic industry and as a result failed to conduct an objective examination, based on positive 
evidence, of the facts with respect to the dome stic industry producing the subject products. 
6. Article 6.5 of the AD Agreement, because Ru ssia treated as confidential, without any good 
cause shown, statistical information obtained fr om the Customs of the Russian Federation, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Belarus, and information supplied by the domestic 
producers in the written application, including the annexes thereof, submissions, the questionnaire responses, and amendments thereof.  
7. Article 6.5.1 of the AD Agreement, because Russia failed to require the domestic producers 
to furnish non-confidential summaries of their a pplication, submissions, questionnaire responses, 
and amendments thereof, and in any event thos e non-confidential summaries, when submitted, 
failed to provide sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the 
information submitted in confidence, including indexes that show meaningful trends. 
8. Article 6.9 of the AD Agreement, because Russi a failed to inform the interested parties of 
the essential facts under consideration which form the basis of the decision to impose anti-
dumping measures, including the essential facts underlying the determinations of the existence of 
dumping and the calculation of the margins of  dumping and the determination of injury. 
9. Articles 12.2 and 12.2.2 of the AD Agreement, because Russia failed to provide in sufficient 
detail the findings and conclusions reached on all issues of fact and law considered material by the 
investigating authorities, as well as all relevant information on the matters of fact and law and 
reasons which have led to the imposition of final measures. In particular, Russia failed to:  
a. provide sufficient detail on the calculation of the dumping margin for Germany;  
b. provide the source of the information concerning import volumes and values;  
c. provide the methodologies used to make the findings concerning import volumes and 
values, domestic sales values, costs, profit; and 
d. provide complete and meaningful indexes of  the domestic industry's injury factors.  
10. Russia's anti-dumping measures on LCVs from the Germany and Italy further are 
inconsistent with Articles 1 and 18.4 of the AD Agreement and Article VI of the GATT 1994,
2 also 
as a consequence of the breaches of the AD Agreement described above.  
Russia's measures, therefore, nullify or impair benefits accruing to the European Union, directly or 
indirectly, under the covered agreements.  
Accordingly, the European Union respectfully re quests that, pursuant to Article XXIII of the 
GATT 1994, Articles 4.7 and 6 of the DSU and Ar ticle 17.4 of the AD Agreement, the Dispute 
Settlement Body establish a panel to examine this matter, with the standard terms of reference as 
set out in Article 7.1 of the DSU. 
The European Union asks that this request be plac ed on the agenda for the meeting of the Dispute 
Settlement Body to be held on 26 September 2014. 
 
__________  
                                               
2 Viz. Protocol on the Accession of the Russian Federation to the World Trade Organization 
(WT/MIN(11)/24, WT/L/839) dated 17 December 2011, para. 2 and Working Party on the Accession of the 
Russian Federation - Report of the Working Party on the Accession of the Russian Federation to the World 
Trade Organization (WT/ACC/RUS/70, WT/MIN( 11)/2), dated 17 November 2011, para 620.