. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/CHN/59 
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/59 11 April 2007 
 
(07-1448) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Original:   English 
 
 
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS 
 
Questions Posed By the United States Regarding  
the Notification of the People’s Republic of China1 
  
 The following communication, dated 4 April 2007, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
The United States appreciates China’s notification of the Rules of the Supreme People’s Court 
on Certain Issues Related to Application of Law in Hearings of Antidumping Administrative Cases as 
effective in January 2003 and s ubmits the following questions:   
1. According to Article 1(1) of the Rules of the Supreme People’s Court on Certain Issues 
Related to Application of Law in Hearings of Antidumping Administrative Cases (the Rules), the 
actions reviewable include "[a] fina l determination on . . . injury or the extent of injury".  Does this 
mean that there is a distinction between a determ ination on "injury" and a determination on "the 
extent of injury"?  If so, please describe the nature of this distinction.   
2. Article 1(2) of the Rules mentions the "retroactive imposition of an antidumping duty".  
Please explain under what conditions and to what exte nt duties are imposed in a retroactive manner.  
Also, please explain whether this is consistent with  the requirements of Article 10 of the Agreement 
on Implementation of Article VI of the Gene ral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the 
Agreement).   
3. Article 1(4) of the Rules states that the Pe ople’s Court shall accept an administrative action 
regarding "other actionable administrative acts in  antidumping proceedings according to the laws and 
regulations".  Do the Rules concerning "other acti onable administrative acts" allow the People’s Court 
to determine which specific proceedings or types of reviews ( e.g. expiry, new shipper, circumvention, 
etc.) shall be accepted for consideration?  If so, please explain how this selection process would be 
consistent with the right to judicial review  embodied in Article 13 of the Agreement.   
4. In Article 2 of the Rules, an interested party refers to "any other na tural person, legal person 
and other organization having legal interests there on".  Is the government of the exporting country 
considered an interested party?   
5. Please describe what factors or considerations unde r Article 5 of the Rules are used to decide 
whether judicial review in an antidumping admini strative case should be h eard before the Interim 
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2/Suppl.5.   G/ADP/Q1/CHN/59 
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/59 Page 2 
 
 
  People’s Court or the Superior People’s Court.  What is the legal impact of decisions made by each of 
these courts and how does the use of separate courts ensure the right to judicial review embodied in 
Article 13 of the Agreement?  In particular, whic h court’s decisions hold higher authority, and may 
one of these court’s decisions be appealed to a higher court?   
6.  Please explain the obligation of the Ministry of Commerce to abide by decisions of the 
People’s Court in order to provide effective judicial review embodied in Article 13 of the Agreement.   
7. Article 7 of the Rules states that the defendant authority shall have the burden of proof for a 
contested administrative act.  Article 8 of the Rules st ates that the plaintiff shall have "the burden of 
proof for the facts he has asserted".  On the basis of these provisions, it is not clear whether the 
authority has the burden of proving that its contested  action is legal, or whether the plaintiff has the 
burden of proving the authority’s contested action is  illegal.  Please explain how these two burden of 
proof provisions are harmonized, and indicate which si de ultimately bears the burden of proving that a 
contested action is (or is not) legal.   
8. Article 7 of the Rules indicates that the "Peopl e’s Court shall rely on the evidence on record 
furnished by the defendant" authority in determining th e legality of the authority’s action.  Article 8 of 
the Rules appears to provide the plaintiff with the opportunity to introduce "relevant, legitimate, and 
authentic" evidence to the Peopl e’s Court.  Could China cl arify whether and under what 
circumstances a plaintiff may introduce evidence to  the People’s Court that is not in the record 
presented by the defendant authority?  Are there me asures in place to ensure the protection of any 
confidential information, pursuant to Article 6.5 of the Agreement?   
9. Article 8 of the Rules states that the plaintiff will not be allowed to introduce any evidence at 
the proceeding if it, during the preceding antidumpi ng investigation, severely impeded the process of 
the investigation in other ways.  Does this mean th at plaintiff will not be able to introduce evidence 
during judicial review that was properly before the ad ministering authority if it is determined that the 
plaintiff "severely impeded" the process of the inv estigation?  Does this standard only relate to 
situations where a facts available finding under Ar ticle 6.8 of the Agreement was made, or does this 
phrase encompass other situations as well?  If it enco mpasses other situations, please explain the types 
of circumstances that are applicable.  Please explain how a plaintiff would be able to contest or defend against a finding that it "severely impeded" the process of the investigation if it is not allowed to introduce evidence during the judicial review process under Article 13 of the Agreement.   
10. Article 11 of the Rules mentions that the "People’s Court may take, as reference, the 
provisions concerning the foreign-related civil proced ures".  Please explain what is meant by "foreign-
related civil procedures" and what is meant by "take, as reference".   
__________