G/ADP/Q1/MNE/3  
G/SCM/Q1/MNE/3  
G/SG/Q1/MNE/3  
 
15 September 2014  
(14-5121)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Committee on Safeguards 
 Original: English  
 
 NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER 
ARTICLES 18.5, 32.6 AND 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS  
FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES 
REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION OF MONTENEGRO1 
The following communication, dated 10 September 2014, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the United States.  
_______________ 
 
 The United States thanks Montenegro for its noti fication of the Decree for the Implementation of 
Law on Foreign Trade No. 52 of 2 August 2004 an d No. 44 of 23 July 2007 (hereinafter "Decree") 
and the replies
2 to the original questions posed by the United States, and poses the following 
questions related to the Decree, as well as foll ow-up questions to the original questions posed:3 
 
Question 14 
 In the original question 3, the United States inquired about the opportunities for appeal and 
judicial review, and the specific procedures and timelines that govern each appeal/judicial review 
proceeding. While Montenegro did reply to those specific questions, it did not indicate as to when such timelines and procedures will be notified to the applicable WTO Committees. Therefore, 
please indicate when such a notification will be made. 
 Question 2 
 
In the original question 6, the United States enquir ed as to how, if at all, related party producers 
would be excluded from the "domestic industry". While Montenegro responded that related party producers are not always excluded from the domestic industry, it did not clarify whether this 
referred to "domestic industry" for purposes of determining standing under Article 37(2) of the 
Foreign Trade Law (hereinafter "Law") or for determining injury for purposes of Article 36(1) of the Law, or both? Please clarify.  
 
Question 3  
In our re-review of the Foreign Trade Law and the revised Decree, we noted that Article 43(3) of 
the Law indicates that duties will be revoked if  an expiry review indicates that dumping or 
subsidies, and injury, "would be unlikely to continue or recur" (emphasis added). Article 11.3 of 
the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreemen t on Tariffs and Trade 
1994 (hereinafter "AD Agreement") and Article 21.3 of the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures ("SCM Agreement"), which state that duties may be continued only if 
                                               
1 G/ADP/N/1/MNE/1/Suppl.1-G/SCM/N/1/MNE/1/Suppl.1–G/SG/N/1/MNE/1/Suppl.1 (dated 
9 May 2014). 
2 G/ADP/Q1/MNE/2–G/SCM/Q1/MNE/2–G/SG/Q1/MNE/2 (dated 24 April 2014). 
3 G/ADP/Q1/MNE/1-G/SCM/Q1/MNE/1-G/SG/Q1/MNE/1 (dated 24 March 2014). 
4 For the sake of efficiency, the Un ited States suggests that committee review for these questions be 
conducted in the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices. G/ADP/Q1/MNE/3 • G/SCM/Q1/MNE/3 • G/SG/Q1/MNE/3 
 
- 2 - 
 
  there is a determination in an expiry review that "expiry of the duty would be likely to lead to a 
continuation or recurrence of [dumping or subsidization] and injury". Please explain how 
Montenegro will ensure that the standard in Article 43(3) will be consistent with these provisions of the AD and SCM Agreement. 
 
 
__________