WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/NOR/6 
G/SCM/Q1/NOR/6 5 November 2009 
 
(09-5528) 
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 
 
Replies to Questions Posed By the EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES1 and  
the UNITED STATES2 Regarding the Notification of NORWAY3 
   The following communication, dated 3 November 2009, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Norway. 
 
_______________ 
 
  It is referred to questions posed by Unit ed States and European Communities in documents 
G/ADP/Q1/NOR/4-G/SCM/Q1/NOR/4, and G/ADP/Q1/NOR/5-G/SCM/Q1/NOR/5 respectively, as 
regards the notification in G/ADP/N/1/NOR/4-G/SCM /N/1/NOR/4 of the Norwegian Customs Act.   
 A. G
ENERAL STATEMENT  
  The questions raised concern the implementa tion of the WTO Agreement into the Norwegian 
domestic customs legislation.  This gives us the opportunity to outline some general aspects of the 
legal status of the WTO Agreements in the No rwegian legal system, a nd the legal techniques 
employed to ensure full conformity with our WTO obligations.     It is necessary to describe the relationship between Norwegian law and public international 
law.  Generally, it is usual to distinguish between monistic and dualistic states.  In monistic states, 
treaties that bind the state are deemed to take i mmediate effect and as such be applied by national 
courts and authorities.     In dualistic states, such as Norway, a special act of implementation is, in principle, required in 
order for the treaty to apply as part of domestic la w.  Such special acts of implementation are not 
necessary if domestic legislation is in harmony wi th the obligations of the treaty.  Thus, where 
legislation already conforms to the WTO obligations there will be no need to promulgate a special law 
to implement the particular WTO obligation.     However, domestic legislation must clearly state, and circumscribe, the level of competence 
and the relevant body authorised to handle cases an d take decisions in question – if decisions are 
required.  It is for this reason that both the new and the former Customs legislation included general 
references to safeguards, anti-dumping measures and countervailing measures, authorizing the 
relevant Ministry to promulgate implementing regulations and take decisions.  As here, often the Act 
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/Q1/NOR/5-G/SCM/Q1/NOR/5.   
2 G/ADP/Q1/NOR/4-G/SCM/Q1/NOR/4.   
3 G/ADP/N/1/NOR/4.   G/ADP/Q1/NOR/6 
G/SCM/Q1/NOR/6 Page 2 
 
 
  itself will only contain general principles coupled with  an authorization to the relevant Ministry to 
develop the provisions further in implementing regu lations.  This can be seen in the new Customs 
Act, where the Act itself contains only a condensed version of the main principles of the relevant 
WTO obligations regarding trade remedies.  Neither  the former Act nor the present Act contained a 
full implementation of all the aspects of the relevant WTO Agreements.   
  Actual investigations in trade remedy situ ations, however, would not, and could not, be 
undertaken before implementing regulations are in place.  Norway has in general followed a cautious line with respect to the use of all trade remedy measures.  No measure has been imposed by Norway 
under the Agreement on Anti-dumping and the Agreemen t on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures in 
recent years, i.e. since the establishment of th e WTO.  The present government has not signalled any 
change of this policy.     Implementing regulations relating to the Agreement on Anti-dumping and the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures were not in place under the previous Customs Act.  The 
government does not intend to promulgate any implementing regulations under the new Act.   
  For this reason, Norway can generally confirm and assure that, if – hypothetically – Norway 
were to introduce implementing regulations in the future;  and, furthermore,  if Norway – 
hypothetically – were to introduce an actual me asure against any imported product, then such 
measures would certainly conform to all Norway's WTO obligations.   
 B. Q
UESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES  
 
Question 1 
 
 Section 10-1(1) includes a third country dumping provision, whereby an anti-dumping 
measure may be implemented at the request of a third country where the dumping causes or 
threatens to cause significant injury to an industry in that country.  Does Norway intend to 
promulgate regulations concerning the procedur es for conducting a third country dumping 
investigation?   
 
Reply  
  The provision in the Customs Act related to  third country dumping is implementing into 
Norwegian law the present provisions of Article 14 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  Norway's 
earlier legislation contained a similar provision.  The provision has never been applied, and Norway 
does not intend to promulgate regulations concer ning the procedures for conducting a third country 
dumping investigation.    
 
Question 2 
 
 The Customs Act refers to material injury findings in Section 10-1(1) for anti-dumping 
investigation and in Section 10-3(1) for countervailing duty investigation, and states that an anti-dumping or countervailing duty measure may be implemented "if the Ministry determines 
that dumping [or subsidization] has taken place, and that the dumping [or subsidization] causes 
significant injury to an industry in the customs territory …".   
 
a. Please explain how the concept of "significa nt injury" conforms to or differs from 
the definition of injury included in footnote 9 of the Antidumping Agreement ("ADA") and footnote 45 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ("ASCM")?    G/ADP/Q1/NOR/6 
 G/SCM/Q1/NOR/6 
 Page 3 
 
 
  b. Please identify the factors the Ministry  will take into account in making a 
determination of "significant injury".  Please confirm that these factors satisfy the 
requirements of Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 of the ADA and Articles 15.1, 15.2, 15.4 and 15.5 of the ASCM.   
 
c. Please identify the factors the Ministry considers in making a determination of 
threat of material injury, in accordance with Article 3.7 of the ADA and Article 15.7 of the ASCM.   
 Reply
 
  It should generally be confirmed that, if Norway introduces an anti-dumping or a countervailing measure, then such measure woul d certainly conform to all Norway's WTO 
obligations, as required by the Customs Act itself.   
 
 Unfortunately there is an error in the tran slation of the Norwegian Customs Act into the 
English, as regards the notion "material injury".  In the notified text, the authoritative Norwegian 
wording was erroneously translated as "significant injury", instead of the correct term "material 
injury".  A corrigendum to the notification will be made.    
 The factors to be taken into account in maki ng a determination of injury, would include all 
relevant evidence including all factors specified in  Article 3 of the Anti-dumping Agreement, or in 
Article 15 of the Agreement on Subsidies and C ountervailing Measures, as appropriate.  The factors 
to be taken into account in making a determination of threat of in jury, would include all relevant 
evidence including all factors specified in Artic le 3.7 of the Anti-dumping Agreement, or in 
Article 15.7 of the Agreement on Subsidies a nd Countervailing Measures, as appropriate.   
 
Question 3 
 
Paragraph (1) of Sections 12-6 and 12-7 states that the "Ministry may, as a step in 
preparing a case, obtain advice from a specially  appointed committee, and entrust to other 
supervisory or control authorities to  carry out an investigation".   
 
a. Please describe the likely composition and expected duties and responsibilities of any 
such "specially appointed advisory commi ttee" and any such "other supervisory or 
control authorities".   
 
b. Would either a "specially appointed commi ttee" or "other supervisory or control 
authority" have the ability to adjust or re mand Ministry of Finance determinations?  
Please clarify which authority of the Government would make the final decision to impose an anti-dumping or countervailing duty.   
 Reply
 
 
 There is de facto  no "specially appointed committee" estab lished for the time being, due to the 
fact that the responsible Ministry, i.e. Ministry  of Finance, does not consider such a committee 
needed.  If in the future a need will be identified,  the committee's composition should be broad, with 
representatives from all sectors and consumers.  However, the Ministry's responsibility and competence will not be influenced by the committee,  due to the fact that the committee should only 
have advisory functions, and its conclu sions shall not bind the Ministry.   
 G/ADP/Q1/NOR/6 
G/SCM/Q1/NOR/6 Page 4 
 
 
  The "specially appointed committee" or "other s upervisory or control authority" will not have 
the ability to adjust or remand the Ministry of Fi nance's determinations.  The Customs Act states 
clearly that imposing a countervailing measure should be determined by the King in council only.   
 
Question 4  
 Section 10-1(8) of the Customs Act states that the Ministry may make regulations 
concerning anti-dumping measures, and Section 12-6(4) of the Act states that the Ministry may make regulations concerning administrative pr ocedure in anti-dumping investigations.  There 
are similar provisions pertaining to countervailin g duty investigations in sections 10-3(7) and 
12-7(4) of the Customs Act.  Does the Ministry  intend to promulgate such regulations?   
 
Reply
 
 
 The Ministry does not intend to promulgate regula tions as mentioned in the sections of the act 
referred to.    
Question 5 
 
Please identify the provisions of, and any co rresponding revisions or amendments to, the 
Public Administration Act of 1967 or other similar legislation that specifies procedures that 
govern the conduct of investigations in anti -dumping or anti-subsidy proceedings.   
 
Reply
 
 
 General provisions in the Public Administra tive Act should be appli cable, setting conditions 
for i.a. preparations, consultations and administrativ e appeal.  As there is no implementation 
regulation, any need for further supplementing regulati ons has not been looked into.  It should also be 
noted that any administrative decision, those done by  the Government in Council inclusively, may be 
subject to appeal in national courts.   
 
C. Q UESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES  
 
Question 1 
  The notified elements of Norway's new Act on Customs Duties and Movement of Goods 
(Customs Act) of 21 December 2007 No. 119 seem to provide only a very general framework of 
Trade defence law.  Similarly, a number of provisions of the Antidumping Agreement (ADA) 
and the Agreement of Subsidies and Counterva iling Measures (ASCM) are not, or only 
summarily, reflected in the law (e.g. the determin ation of injury and causal link (Articles 3.2, 
3.4, 3.5, and 3.6 ADA);  imposition of duties (Articles 9.2., 9.3.1, 9.3.2, 9.3.3);  rules on sampling (Articles 6.10, 6.10.1, 6.10.2 and 9.4 ADA);  treatment of confidential information).  Could 
Norway therefore please clarify whether the notified elements relating to Trade Remedy 
Measures will be supplemented by detailed rules?   
 
Reply
 
 
 Norway has no intention to promulgate such regulations for the time being, as mentioned in 
the general statement.    G/ADP/Q1/NOR/6 
 G/SCM/Q1/NOR/6 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Question 2  
 
 Section 10-1 (5) provides that the duration of the provisional duty may be extended to 
respectively six and nine months should the investigation indicate that a customs duty less than 
the margin of dumping will be sufficient to ensure that no injury is caused.  This implies that 
Norway applies the lesser duty rule.  Could Norway please confirm this?   
 
Reply  
 
 The lesser duty rule in Article 7.4 of the Anti-dumping Agreement is implemented explicitly 
in the Customs Act Section 10-1 (4).  The Act gi ves, in line with Article 7.4 of the Anti-Dumping 
Agreement, an option to apply the lesser duty ru le.  If a provisional measure is applied for an 
extended period of 9 months, the lesser duty rule would have to be applied.   
 Question 3  
 
 The relevant elements of Norway's new Act on Customs Duties and Movement of Goods 
(Customs Act) of 21 December 2007 No. 119 do  not foresee any procedural rules on how to 
conduct anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations.  Could Norway please explain whether the procedural rules concerning the conduction of  anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations 
respectively are set forth in another legal act?  In case of affirmative, could Norway please 
indicate the notification reference of that act?   
 
Reply
 
 
 Certain procedural rules concerning th e conduct of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy 
investigations are set forth in the Customs Act S ection 12-6 and Section 12-7, which are contained in 
Norway's notification.  Accordingly the Ministry  may make regulations concerning administrative 
procedures.  Furthermore reference is made to our reply to question number 5 from the United States.   
 
__________