. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS283/8 
25 January 2005 
 
 (05-0322) 
 Original:   English 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – EX PORT SUBSIDIES ON SUGAR 
 
Notification of an Other Appeal by Thailand  
under Article 16.4 and Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules  
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU),  
and under Rule 23(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review   
   The following notification, dated 25 January 200 5, from the Delegation of Thailand, is being 
circulated to Members. 
_______________ 
 
 
Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Appellate Body 's Working Procedures for Appellate Review, 
Thailand hereby notifies its decision to appeal to th e Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in 
the Panel Report European Communities – Export Subsidies on Sugar  (Complaint by Thailand) , 
WT/DS283/R, (the "Panel Report") and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel in that 
Report. 
 Thailand seeks appellate review of:  
(a) the Panel's decision, set out in paragraphs 7. 380-7.387 and in paragraphs 6.14 -6.15 of the 
Panel Report, not to make findings on the claims  of Thailand under Articles 3.1(a) and 3.2 of 
the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (the "SCM Agreement");  and  
(b) the Panel's consequent failure to make a r ecommendation in accordance with Article 4.7 of 
the SCM Agreement.    
 
The Panel's decision was based on the following erroneous findings: 
 
- that the Panel's rulings under the Agreement on Agriculture should be sufficient to fully 
resolve the dispute between the parti es (para. 7.383 of the Panel Report); 
- that there was "some issue" as to whether th e Panel was entitled to make a recommendation in 
accordance with Article 4.7 of the SCM Agreemen t in the circumstances before it (para. 7.384 
of the Panel Report); 
- that the Panel was not required to rule on the Complainants' claims under the SCM 
Agreement "merely in order to obtain what might - but would not necessarily be - more rapid 
compliance" (para. 7.384 of the Panel Report);  
- that the Panel's exercise of judicial economy did not diminish the rights of the Complainants 
with the meaning of Article 19.2 of the U nderstanding on Rules and Procedures Governing 
the Settlement of Disputes (the "DSU") (p ara. 7.385 of  the Panel Report); and  
- that an additional consideration relevant to th e Panel's decision to exercise judicial economy 
was that the Complainants focu sed their claims on the Agreement on Agriculture and did not 
set forth their claims under Article 3 of the SCM Agreement in quite as clear and 
unambiguous manner as under the Agreement on Agriculture (paras. 6.15 and 7.386 of the 
Panel Report).  WT/DS283/8 
Page 2  
 
The Panel's decision not to rule on Thailand's claims under the SCM Agreement has deprived 
Thailand of the remedies available under Article 4 of the SCM Agreement, including Thailand's right 
under Article 4.7, first sentence, to a recommendati on that those export subsidies on sugar that are 
inconsistent with the SCM Agreem ent and the Agreement on Agriculture be withdrawn without delay;  
Thailand's right under Article 4.7, second sentence,  that the Panel specify the time-period within 
which those subsidies must be withdrawn; and Tha iland's right to take countermeasures in accordance 
with the criteria and procedures set out in Article 4.10 of the SCM Agreement in the event that the 
European Communities fails to withdraw those subsidies.  
 The Panel's failure to accord Thailand its ri ghts under Articles 4 of the SCM Agreement is 
inconsistent with Articles 3.2 and 19.2 of the DSU,  which require panels a nd the Appellate Body not 
to "... diminish the rights ... provided in the cove red agreements".  The Panel's failure to provide a 
recommendation under Article 4.7 of the SCM Agreemen t is also inconsistent with a panel's duty 
under Article 11 of the DSU to "make ... findings as will assist the DSB in making the recommendations or in giving the rulings provi ded for in the covered agreements".   
 
Thailand requests the Appellate Body to reverse the Panel's legal findings and conclusions on 
judicial economy.  It further requests the Appellate  Body to preserve Thailand's rights under Article 
4.7 and 4.10 of the SCM Agreement in accordance with Articles 3.2 and 19. 2 of the DSU by ruling, 
on the basis of the factual findings by the Panel a nd the undisputed facts in the Panel record, on the 
claims that Thailand made under Articles 3.1( a) and 3.2 of SCM Agreement and making the 
recommendation provided under Article  4.7 of the SCM Agreement. 
 The provisions of the covered agreements th at Thailand considers the Panel to have 
erroneously interpreted or applied includ e, in addition to those cited above: 
 
- Articles 1.2 and Appendix 2 to the DSU; 
- Articles 3.4, 3.7, and 19.1 of the DSU;  and  
- Articles 13(c)(ii) and 21.1 of the Agreement on Agriculture. 
 
__________