WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS269/16 
31 July 2006 
 
 (06-3632) 
 Original:   English 
  
 
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – CUSTOMS CLASSIFICATION 
OF FROZEN BONELESS CHICKEN CUTS 
 
Understanding between Brazil and the European Communities
 
Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU  
 
  The following communication, dated 26 July 2006, from the delegation of Brazil and the delegation of the European Communities to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is 
circulated at the request of these delegations. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Brazil and the European Communities would like to inform the Dispute Settlement Body of 
the attached "Understanding between Brazil and th e European Communities" with respect to the 
dispute European Communities – Customs Classifica tion of Frozen Boneless Chicken Cuts  
(WT/DS269).  WT/DS269/16 
Page 2  
 
  Understanding between Brazil and the European Communities
 
 
 
 Noting the Status Reports by the European Communities (WT/DS269/15 and WT/DS269/15/Add.1) and the statements of the pa rties to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) 
relating to this dispute, 
  Having regard to the fact that the Europ ean Communities considers that by adopting and 
applying Commission Regulation (EC) No 949/2006 it has fully complied with the DSB recommendations and rulings in this dispute within  the reasonable period of time granted to it under 
Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes  
(DSU),   Mindful that Commission Regulation (EC) No 949/2006 was enacted on the last day of such reasonable period of time and considering that Brazil still has doubts on compliance and believes it 
necessary to have the opportunity to assess whether th e referred Regulation, as such and as applied, 
conforms to such recommendations and rulings, Braz il and the European Comm unities ("the parties to 
the dispute") have agreed on the following procedur es for the exclusive purposes of this dispute: 
 1. Should Brazil consider that the situation descr ibed in Article 21.5 of the DSU exists, Brazil 
will request consultations which the parties to  the dispute will hold within 12 days from the 
date of circulation of such request. The parties to the dispute agree that at the end of such 
period for consultations, should either party so state, the parties to the dispute will 
immediately and jointly consider that such c onsultations have failed to settle the dispute. 
  Consequently, Brazil is entitled at any time to request the establishment of a panel pursuant to 
Article 21.5 of the DSU. 
 2. At the first DSB meeting at which Brazil’s request for the establishment of an Article 21.5 
panel appears on the agenda, the European Comm unities shall accept the establishment of that 
panel. 
 
3. The parties to the dispute shall cooperate to en able the Article 21.5 panel to circulate its report 
within 90 days of the panel's establishment, excluding such time during which the panel's 
work may be suspended pursuant to Article 12.12 of the DSU. 
 4. Either party to the dispute may request the DS B to adopt the report of the Article 21.5 panel at 
a DSB meeting held at least 20 days after the circulation of the report to the Members unless 
either party appeals the report. If a party to th e dispute has notified its decision to appeal, the 
report by the Article 21.5 panel shall not be considered for adoption by the DSB until after 
completion of the appeal.  
 5. In the event of an appeal against the Article 21.5 panel report, the parties to the dispute shall 
cooperate to enable the Appellate Body to circ ulate its report to the Members within no more 
than 60 days from the date of notification of the appeal to the DSB. 
 6. In the event of an appeal, either party to th e dispute may request the DSB to adopt the reports 
of the Appellate Body and the Article 21.5 pane l (as modified by the Appellate Body report) 
at a DSB meeting held within 30 days of the ci rculation of the Appellate Body report to the 
Members. 
  WT/DS269/16 
 Page 3 
 
 
  7. Brazil shall not request authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations under 
Article 22 of the DSU until the adoption by th e DSB of the Article 21.5 panel report and, 
where relevant, the Appellate Body report.   
 8. If the DSB adopts recommendations and rulin gs that measures taken by the European 
Communities to comply with the prior recommendations and rulings of the DSB do not exist 
or are inconsistent with a covered agreement,  Brazil has the right under Article 22.2 of the 
DSU to request negotiations with the Europ ean Communities with a view to developing 
mutually acceptable compensation, and to re quest authorization from the DSB to suspend 
concessions or other obligations pursuant to  Articles 22.2 and 22.6 of the DSU.   
 
9. Subject to paragraphs 7 and 8, Brazil has th e right to request the DSB authorization referred 
to therein at any future date. The Europ ean Communities shall not assert that Brazil is 
precluded from obtaining such DSB authorization on the grounds that the request was made 
outside the 30-day time-period specified in Article 22.6 of the DSU.  
 
10. The European Communities retains the right to  object to the level of suspension proposed, or 
to claim that the principles and procedures set forth in Article 22.3 of the DSU have not been followed, and to have the matter referred to arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU. 
 
11. The parties to the dispute will cooperate to en able the arbitrator under Article 22.6 of the DSU 
to circulate its decision within 60 days of the referral to arbitration.  
 12. The parties to the dispute will cooperate to fac ilitate the participation of  the original panelists 
in the Article 21.5 compliance panel and the Article 22.6 arbitration.  
 
13. If any of the original panelists is not availa ble for either the Article 21.5 compliance panel or 
the Article 22.6 arbitration (or both), the parties to the dispute  will immediately request the 
Director-General of the WTO to appoint, within five days of being so requested, a replacement for the proceeding or proceedings in which a replacement is required.  If an 
original panelist is unavailable to serve in eith er of the proceedings, the parties to the dispute 
will further request that, in making this appoint ment, the Director-General seek a person who 
will be available to act in both proceedings. 
 14. The parties to this dispute  will continue to cooperate in all matters related to this 
Understanding  and not to raise any procedural objection to  any of the steps set out herein.  If, 
during the application of these procedures, the par ties to the dispute consider that a procedural 
aspect has not been properly addressed in this Understanding, they will endeavour to find a 
solution within the shortest time possible that will not affect the other aspects and steps agreed herein.  
 
 
Signed in Geneva, 26 July 2006:    (signed) (signed) 
 H.E. Mr Clodoaldo Hugueney H.E. Mr Carlo Trojan 
 Ambassador Ambassador  Permanent Representative of Brazil Permanent Representative   for the European Communities  
__________