WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
27 July 2010 
 (10-4016) 
 Original:   English 
 
 
WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW 
 
Communication from the Appellate Body  
   The following communication, dated 27 July 201 0, from the Chairman of the Appellate Body, 
addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settleme nt Body, is being circulated to Members. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
 I refer to my letter of 16 December 2009 to your predecessor, Ambassador Gero, regarding 
proposed amendments to the Working Procedures for Appellate Review (the " Working Procedures ").  
This proposal was subsequently circulated to all WTO Members as document WT/AB/WP/W/10, and 
Ambassador Gero initiated, and you completed,  a process of consultation with WTO Members 
regarding the proposed amendments, in accordan ce with the DSB Decision of 19 December 2002 
(WT/DSB/31).   
 
 The process of consultation has been a very fruitful one.  My colleagues and I very much appreciate the interest shown by Members in th e amendments under consideration and found most 
helpful the careful and detailed comments provide d to us both in the course of the 18 May 2010 
regular DSB meeting, and in writing.  We have gi ven careful consideration to all of the comments 
received and have taken them into account in revi sing and otherwise reflecting upon our proposal.  
  Having benefited from the comments of Me mbers, and having consulted you and the 
Director-General in accordance with Article 17.9 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures for 
the Settlement of Disputes  (the "DSU"), we now intend to adopt a final version of the amendments.  
With one exception, we are proceeding with the am endments to the Rules referred to in document 
WT/AB/WP/W/10, albeit in modified form.  We ha ve decided not to introduce a new paragraph 1 bis 
to Rule 16 of the Working Procedures  regarding consolidation of appella te proceedings at this time.  
Rather, as necessary, we will continue to deal with  any issues regarding the c onsolidation of appellate 
proceedings on an ad hoc  basis, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 16(1). 
 
 Annex A to this letter sets out an explanation of  how we will proceed with  respect to each of 
the three amendments proposed, in particular, regard ing those amendments that have been revised in 
light of Members' comments.  The amended legal text of Rules 6(3), 18(1), 18(2), 18(4), 21(1), 22(1), 23(1), 23(3), 23(4), 24(1), 24(2), 27(1), 32(1), and 32 (2), and Annexes I and III, marking the changes 
from the current version of those Rules, is set out in Annex B, along with a list of technical 
amendments affecting only the Spanish and French versions of the Working Procedures .   
  The amendments will enter into effect on 15 September 2010 and will apply to appeals 
initiated on or after that date.  Appeals initiated before  that date will be unaffected by the new Rules.   
A clean, consolidated version of the amended Working Procedures  will be circulated to Members, as 
document WT/AB/WP/6, a month before they come into effect.  On 15 September 2010, the current 
Working Procedures (WT/AB/WP/5) will be re-issued with a cover note indicating that they are no 
longer in effect. WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 2  
 
   
 We have repeatedly emphasized the important contribution made by the Working Procedures 
to the timely and efficient conduct of appeals and thus to the security and predictability of WTO 
dispute settlement.  Likewise, we recognize the im portance of continuous monitoring and evaluation 
of the functioning of the Working Procedures  and welcome Members' contributions in this regard.  
We also remain mindful that a successful conclusion of the negotiations on clarifications and 
improvements to the DSU may require further updating of the Working Procedures. 
    WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 3 
 
 
 Annex A  
 
Amendments to the Working Procedures for Appellate Review :  Explanatory Notes 
 
I. Timeline for Written Submissions 
A. Deadlines for the Appellant's Submission, the Notice of Other Appeal, and the Other 
Appellant's Submission 
 In our letter of 16 December 20091, we proposed to modify the deadlines for the filing of the 
appellant's submission, the Notice of Other Appeal, and the other appellant's submission.  In making 
this proposal, we sought to allow the Appellate Bo dy and the other WTO Members participating in an 
appeal to focus as soon as possible on the substance of the arguments made in support of the specific 
issues of law and legal interpretati on appealed and, thereby, to foster a more efficient use of time 
during the 90-day appeal period.  We proposed, in particular, to eliminate the current 7-day period between the filing of a Notice of Appeal and the f iling of the appellant's submission, as well as the 
current 3-day period between the filing of a Notic e of Other Appeal and the filing of the other 
appellant's submission.  Our proposal retained the 5-day interval between the filing of the appellant's 
submission and the filing of any Notice of Other Appeal.     In proposing these modifications to the Working Procedures , we considered that the relatively 
long period between the date on which parties are ma de aware of the content of panel reports and the 
time during which an appeal can be filed affords potential appellants and ot her appellants adequate 
preparation time, including time to draft relevant Notices and submissions.  We further took the view 
that the 7- and 3-day periods that exist under the current Working Procedures  could be more valuable, 
during an appeal, if they could be used by the Ap pellate Body and all Members participating in the 
appeal to prepare for the oral hearing, inter alia , on the basis of an analysis of the contents of all the 
written submissions in support of the appeal.  While  some WTO Members did not share our view that 
the time between the release of a panel report to th e parties and the initiation of an appeal makes it 
appropriate to advance certain deadlines within  the 90-day appeal period, many WTO Members 
recognized that doing so will allow for a more effici ent allocation of the limited time available during 
an appeal.    
 In light of the above, we are amending Rules 21(1), 23(1), and 23(3) to provide that the 
appellant's submission
2 will be due on the same day as the filin g of the Notice of Appeal, and that the 
Notice of Other Appeal and the other appellant's su bmission will be due 5 days after the filing of the 
Notice of Appeal.  
B. Deadline for the Appellee's Submission 
 In proposing that the appellee's submission be  due 15 days after the filing of the Notice of 
Appeal and the appellant's submission, we sought  to reduce the imbalan ce resulting from the fact 
that—currently—the appellee's submission is due  18 days after the filing of the appellant's 
submission, whereas the "other" appellee's submissi on is due 10 days after the filing of the other 
appellant's submission.   
 
 We recognize, nonetheless, the concerns expressed by many Members that, under our 
proposal, the interval between the appellant's s ubmission and the appellee's submission would be 
reduced from 18 days to 15 days.  These Members also stressed that the a ppellee needs sufficient time 
                                                     
 
1This communication was circulated on 12 January 2010 as document WT/AB/WP/W/10. 
2All references to the singular should be read as also including the plural. WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 4  
 
  to respond to the appellant's submission.  Taking  account of the expressed preference that there be no 
reduction in the time period between the filing of the appellant's submission and the filing of the 
appellee's submission, and conscious  of our overall objective of enhancing the efficient use of the 
limited time available in appellate proceedings for a ll participants, we have decided to maintain the 
current 18-day interval between these two deadlines.   Accordingly, we are amending Rules 22(1) and 
23(4) to provide that an appellee's submission will be due 18 days after the filing of the Notice of 
Appeal.  
C. Deadline for Third Participants'  Submissions and Notifications 
 We also proposed that third participants' subm issions and notifications would be due on a day 
separate from, and 3 days subsequent to, the filing date for the appellee's submission.  This would 
enable third participants to respond in their writte n submissions to the appe llee's submission, as well 
as to the appellant's and the other appellant's submissi ons.  This should also assist participants in their 
preparations for the oral hearing because, when thir d participants file written submissions, participants 
would have earlier notice of the third participants ' comments on the positions of all participants' 
written submissions.  We agree with the observation made by several Members that such a staggered 
deadline could contribute to a more efficient oral he aring.  Some Members suggested that, in order to 
afford third participants sufficient time to react to the content of the appellee's submission, the interval 
between the deadline for the filing of the appell ee's submission and the deadline for the third 
participants' submissions should be longer than 3 days .  Yet, in light of the highly compressed appeal 
schedule, we do not believe that affording third participants a longer period of time would be 
compatible with our objective of modifying the appe al timetable so as to achieve the most efficient 
allocation of the limited time available in a way that affords all participants and third participants, as 
well as the Appellate Body, more time to pr operly reflect upon and take account of written 
submissions in preparation for the oral hearing.    
 We wish to assure Members that this amendm ent will not result in any reduced opportunity 
for third participants to make oral statements and respond to questions at the oral hearing.  At the 
same time, we wish to recall the provisions of Rule  24(3), which encourage third participants to file 
written submissions to facilitate their positions being taken fully into account. 
  In view of all of the above, we have decided to amend Rules 24(1) and 24(2) to provide that 
third participants' submissions and notifications will be due 21 days after the filing of the Notice of 
Appeal, that is, 3 days after the deadline for the filing of the appellee's submission. 
 
D. Notice of Appeal 
 As explained in our proposal, we did not intend or propose to eliminate the Notice of Appeal 
or the Notice of Other Appeal.  We believe that  the Notice of Appeal remains necessary because it 
commences the proceedings before the Appellate Body  and, together with a Notice of Other Appeal, 
serves the important function of demarcating the scope of appellate review in a specific dispute.  In 
addition, since it has become customary for Member s to send the Notice of Appeal to the DSB when 
notifying their decision to appeal pursuant to the provisions of Article 16.4 of the DSU, these Notices 
also serve an important transparency functio n in that they notify WTO Members of the 
commencement of an appeal and inform the Membership as a whole of its nature.   
  We note that, in the course of their consu ltations with the DSB Chairman, some Members 
raised questions about the continuing need for Notices of Appeal and Other Appeal, as well as for 
Rule 23 bis regarding the amendment of Notices of Appeal  and Other Appeal.  The Appellate Body 
has on several occasions expressed the view  that the Notice of Appeal also serves to provide adequate 
notice to the appellee of the "nature of the appeal" an d the "allegations of error", which in turn enables  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 5 
 
 
 the appellee to exercise fully its rights of defence.3  It is true that an appellee will have a better 
understanding of the nature of the appeal and the allegations of error when a detailed written 
submission is filed on the same day.  Nevertheless,  we continue to hold the view that there is 
significant value, both to Members participating in th e appeal and to the Appellate Body, in requiring 
a concise and precise statement of the errors of law and legal interpretation subject to appeal.  Indeed, 
just such considerations led the Appellate Body to introduce, in 2005, the requirement that the other 
appellant also file a notice of its other appeal.  In our view, eliminati on of the existing requirements to 
provide, in the Notices, a brief statement of the natu re of the appeal and other appeal could create a 
risk of uncertainty as to the precise demarcation of t hose appeals.  This is because the exact scope of 
an appeal and other appeal may not always be cl ear from the arguments cont ained in the appellant's 
and other appellant's submissions, particularly  when such submissions are very lengthy. 
 
We thus have decided to preserve the Notices of  Appeal and Other Appeal as documents that 
define the scope of appeal.  It follows that Rule 23 bis, too, continues to have relevance.  With regard 
to a concern expressed by some Members that  retaining these requirements could encourage 
procedural objections relating to the Notices, with a corresponding loss of precious time during the 
appeal period, we note that, since the Appellate B ody amended Rules 20 and 23 in 2005, procedural 
disputes regarding the sufficiency of Notices of Appeal have been infrequent. 
E. Date Range for the Oral Hearing  
In conjunction with our proposal to advance cer tain deadlines during the appellate process, 
we proposed to modify Rule 27(1) to specify that or al hearings will, as a gene ral rule, be held between 
30 and 40 days (rather than between 35 and 45 da ys) after the commencement of an appeal.  No 
Member commented on this aspect of our proposal.  Since, however, we have decided to move the 
deadlines for the appellees' and third participants' submissions back by 3 days as compared to our 
original proposal, we have also decided to adjust our proposed date range for oral hearings.  We will 
thus amend Rule 27(1) to specify that oral hearings  will, as a general rule, be held between 30 and 45 
days after the filing of the Notice of Appeal. 
F. Changes to Annex I  
 All of the above amendments require certain changes to Annex I of the Working Procedures , 
as outlined in the Annexes to this communication.  In particular, the revised Annex I reflects a new 
timetable for the filing of written documents and for the holding of oral hearings in both general and 
prohibited subsidies appeals.4   
                                                      
3Appellate Body Report, United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products , 
paras. 95-97;  Appellate Body Report, United States – Import Measures on Certain Products from the European 
Communities , para. 62;  Appellate Body Report, United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 
2000 , para. 200. 
4To date, no appeal has ever been conducted unde r the accelerated timeframes set out for prohibited 
subsidies appeals.  Although one Member expressed concern regarding the impractical nature of certain 
deadlines in prohibited subsidies appeals—notably for third participants—we believe, based on past experience, that the infrequency with which this issue appears jus tifies leaving Annex I as proposed above.  Any difficulties 
that may arise in a specific appeal involving prohibited subsidies could be addressed on a case-by-case basis 
under Rule 16 of the Working Procedures.  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 6  
 
  II. Filing and Service of Electronic Documents 
 The second amendment that we proposed concerned the Rules governing the filing and 
service of documents.  This reflects our conviction that the increased use of electronic means represents the future of WTO dispute settlement in sofar as the filing of documents is concerned.  
Comments from Members showed that  they shared our conviction in this regard.  In making this 
proposal, we intended it to serve only as a first st ep toward the establishment of a more reliable, 
electronic-based system, and to recognize that Member s participating in appeals currently make use of 
electronic mail.  We are aware that putting a dedicated electronic server system in place would be preferable, recognize modern technological realities, accord with trends in domestic and international 
tribunals, and allow for reduced dependence on paper.  Indeed, funds have already been allocated for 
the creation of a digital dispute settlement registry  within the WTO Secretariat as a whole and this 
project—which will include the Appellate Body—is underway, albeit still in an early stage.  We 
welcome this initiative and Members' support of it,  and will work with others within the WTO 
Secretariat on the design and implementation of the project.    
 As for the specifics of our proposal, we have taken due account of many of the concerns 
expressed by Members regarding the amendments that  we proposed, notably with respect to such 
issues as potential technical glitches, confidentiality of  e-mails, and difficulties in verifying the timing 
of e-mails and the identity of their senders.  We also note that many Members did not see benefits in the filing of paper copies the day after  the deadline, in cases where an electronic copy was filed before 
the deadline, nor in our proposal that, in the case of  any discrepancy between the electronic and paper 
copies, the electronic version would prevail.  In view of the concerns expressed by Members, we 
consider it appropriate to await the creation of th e digital dispute settlement registry that will be 
capable of addressing these concerns.  We have ther efore decided to modify our original proposal in 
order to codify current practice.   
 
 As we observed in our proposal, the sending of electronic copies of documents by e-mail has become the norm in appeals in recent years.  Typi cally, participants and th ird participants send an 
electronic version of their documents to the e-mail address of the Appellate Body Secretariat on the day the documents are due, followed by delivery of th e paper copies to the A ppellate Body Secretariat 
on the same day.  Other parties/participants and th ird parties/third participants are copied on the 
e-mail sent to the Appellate Body Secretariat and are served the paper copies on the same day.  We 
note that many Members expressed the view that, for now, it should be the delivery of the paper copies that determines whether or not the filing re quirements set out in Rule 18 have been complied 
with.  At the same time, we understand that Memb ers benefit from the practical utility of obtaining a 
supplementary, electronic copy of documents filed in paper form.  Similarly, it is extremely useful for 
the Appellate Body to have access to electronic versions of documents.  
  In light of these facts, and given that a pr eference has been expressed  for maintaining the 
status quo pending implementation of a secure digital di spute settlement registry that could be used to 
upload and download documents, we have decided to  proceed with amendments that reflect current 
practice and are less extensive than  those originally proposed.  Mo re specifically, we are amending 
the Working Procedures to provide that:  (i) official versions of documents in paper form are to be 
submitted to the Appellate Body Secretariat by 17: 00 Geneva time on the day that the document is 
due;  and (ii) an electronic copy of each such document should also be submitted to the Appellate 
Body by the same deadline.   The electronic copy could be delivered either by e-mail or, for example 
in cases where Members have concerns about the security  of e-mail transmissions, through delivery of 
a data storage device—such as a CD-ROM or USB flash drive—containing the electronic copy.  
When a Member submits an electr onic copy by e-mail, the Appellate Body Secretariat will confirm 
receipt by return e-mail.  We are also making similar provision for the service of documents on the other parties and third parties in the appeal.  Finally, because the number of paper copies to be  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 7 
 
 
 submitted to the Appellate Body Secretariat in a given appeal will vary and may diminish following 
the implementation of the digital dispute settlement  registry, we do not consider it practical to 
prescribe a specific number of copies in the Working Procedures .  Information regarding the number 
of paper copies requested in a specific appeal w ill be available from the Appellate Body Secretariat 
prior to the possible commencement of an appeal. 
 
We are amending paragraphs 1, 2,  and 4 of Rule 18 accordingly. 
III. Consolidation of Appellate Proceedings 
We have decided not to pursue our proposed am endment regarding conso lidation of appellate 
proceedings, although we may revisit this issue at a later date.  We continue to believe that a more 
systematic approach to consolidation, including iden tification of the criteria to be taken into account 
in our determination of when consolidation w ould be appropriate, w ould benefit all potential 
participants in an appeal.  Our proposal in th is regard was not based on concerns with how 
consolidation under Rule 16(1) of the Working Procedures has operated in the past, but rather on a 
desire to enhance the transparency and predictab ility of consolidation for the WTO Membership.  In 
their comments on this amendment, however, many  Members expressed a preference for maintaining 
the status quo.   
 We have decided to introduce no changes to Rule  16 at this time.  We will thus continue to 
take decisions on consolidation in  appropriate cases on the basis of Rule 16(1), after consulting with 
the participants. 
IV. Technical Amendments 
All of the above also necessitates that certain  consequential amendments be made to the 
Working Procedures .  More specifically, we have added a row to the Table set out in Annex III 
indicating the latest amendments to the Working Procedures and the relevant explanatory documents 
and DSB meeting minutes.  In order to avoid any risk that Rule 32 could be read so as to imply that the Rules, as adopted in 1996, remain unchanged and in  force, we have decided to include an express 
reference, in the text of paragra phs 1 and 2, to the fact that there have been amendments to the 
Working Procedures , and to refer to the relevant Table set out in Annex III.   
 
We are also correcting two clerical errors in Ru le 6(3).  The sub-headings (i), (ii), and (iii) 
should read (a), (b), and (c) in order to be consistent with the remainder of the Working Procedures , 
and the word "Rules" in existing Rule 6(3)(i) should be singular rather than plural. 
 Lastly, in the Spanish version of the Working Procedures , we are correcting a few clerical 
errors and harmonizing certain terminology so that it is consistent with the language used in the 
amendments described above.  These adjustments affect  the Rules set out in full in Annex B, as well 
as Rules 1, 23 bis(2) and 26(4) of the Working Procedures .  We are also correcting one clerical error 
in the French version of the Working Procedures.  
 WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 8  
 
  Annex B
 
 
Amendments to the Working Procedures for Appellate Review  
 
1. Timeline for Written Submissions 
Rules 21, 22, and 23 will be amended as follows: 
 
Appellant's Submission 
 
21. (1) The appellant shall, within 7 days after  on the same day as  the date of the filing of 
the Notice of Appeal, file with the Secr etariat a written submission prepared in 
accordance with paragraph 2 and serve a copy of the submission on the other parties to the dispute and third parties. 
 
(2) A written submission referred to in paragraph 1 shall  
 
(a) be dated and signed by the appellant;  and 
(b) set out  
(i) a precise statement of the grounds for the appeal, including the 
specific allegations of errors in the issues of law covered in the panel 
report and legal interpretations deve loped by the panel, and the legal 
arguments in support thereof; 
(ii) a precise statement of the provisions of the covered agreements and 
other legal sources relied on;  and 
(iii) the nature of the decision or ruling sought. 
 
 
Appellee's Submission 
 
22. (1) Any party to the dispute that wishes to respond to allegations rais ed in an appellant's 
submission filed pursuant to Rule 21 may, within 25
 18 days after the date of the 
filing of the Notice of Appeal, file with the Secretariat a written submission prepared 
in accordance with paragraph 2 and serve a copy of the submission on the appellant, 
other parties to the dispute and third parties. 
 
(2) A written submission referred to in paragraph 1 shall 
 
(a) be dated and signed by the appellee;  and (b) set out  
(i) a precise statement of the grounds for opposing the specific 
allegations of errors in the issues of law covered in the panel report 
and legal interpretations develope d by the panel raised in the 
appellant's submission, and the legal arguments in support thereof; 
(ii) an acceptance of, or opposition to, each ground set out in the 
appellant's submission; 
(iii) a precise statement of the provisions of the covered agreements and 
other legal sources relied on;  and 
(iv) the nature of the decision or ruling sought.   WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 9 
 
 
 Multiple Appeals 
 
23. (1) Within 12  5 days after the date of the filing of the Notice of Appeal, a party to the 
dispute other than the original appellant may join in that appeal or appeal on the basis of other alleged errors in the issues of law covered in the panel report and legal 
interpretations developed by the panel.  Th at party shall notify the DSB in writing of 
its appeal and shall simultaneously file a Notice of Other Appeal with the Secretariat. 
  (2) A Notice of Other Appeal shall include the following information: 
 
(a) the title of the panel report under appeal; 
(b) the name of the party to the dispute filing the Notice of Other Appeal; (c) the service address, telephone and facsimile numbers of the party to the 
dispute;  and either 
 
(i) a statement of the issues raised on appeal by another participant with 
which the party joins;  or 
(ii) a brief statement of the nature of the other appeal, including:  
(A) identification of the alleged errors in the issues of law 
covered in the panel report and legal interpretations 
developed by the panel; 
(B) a list of the legal provision(s) of the covered agreements that 
the panel is alleged to have erre d in interpreting or applying;  
and 
(C) without prejudice to the ability of the other appellant to refer 
to other paragraphs of the pane l report in the context of its 
appeal, an indicative list of the paragraphs of the panel report 
containing the alleged errors. 
 
(3) The other appellant shall, within 15
 5 days after the date of the filing of the Notice of 
Appeal, file with the Secretariat a written submission prepared in accordance with 
paragraph 2 of Rule 21 and serve a copy of the submission on the other parties to the 
dispute and third parties. 
 (4) The appellant, any appellee and any other party to the dispute that wishes to respond 
to a submission filed pursuant to paragra ph 3 may file a written submission within 
25
 18 days after the date of the filing of the Notice of Appeal, and any such 
submission shall be in the format re quired by paragraph 2 of Rule 22. 
 (5) This Rule does not preclude a party to the dispute which has not filed a submission 
under Rule 21 or a Notice of Other Appeal under paragraph 1 of this Rule from exercising its right of appeal pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the DSU. 
 
(6) Where a party to the dispute which ha s not filed a submission under Rule 21 or a 
Notice of Other Appeal under paragraph 1 of th is Rule exercises its right to appeal as 
set out in paragraph 5, a single division shall examine the appeals. WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 10  
 
  Rule 24 will be amended as follows: 
Third Participants 
 
24. (1) Any third party may file a written submission containing th e grounds and legal 
arguments in support of its position.  Such submission shall be filed within 25
 21 days 
after the date of the filing of the Notice of Appeal. 
 
(2) A third party not filing a written subm ission shall, within the same period  
of 25  21 days, notify the Secretariat in writing if it intends to appear at the oral 
hearing, and, if so, whether it intends to make an oral statement. 
 
(3) Third participants are encouraged to file written submissions to facilitate their 
positions being taken fully into account by the division hearing the appeal and in 
order that participants and other third partic ipants will have notice of positions to be 
taken at the oral hearing. 
 
 (4) Any third party that has neither filed a written submission pursu ant to paragraph 1, 
nor notified the Secretariat pursuant to para graph 2, may notify the Secretariat that it 
intends to appear at the oral hearing, and ma y request to make an oral statement at the 
hearing.  Such notifications and requests should be notified to the Secretariat in 
writing at the earliest opportunity. 
 
Rule 27 will be amended as follows: 
Oral Hearing 
 
27. (1) A division shall hold an oral hearing, which shall be held, as a general rule, between 
35 30 and 45 days after the date of the filing of a Notice of Appeal. 
 
(2) Where possible in the working schedule or otherwise at the earliest possible date, the 
Secretariat shall notify all parties to the di spute, participants, third parties and third 
participants of the date for the oral hearing.  
 
 (3) (a) Any third party that has filed a submission pursuant to Rule 24(1), or has 
notified the Secretariat pursuant to Rule 24(2) that it intends to appear at the oral hearing, may appear at the oral hearing, make an oral statement at the hearing, and respond to questions posed by the division. 
  (b) Any third party that has notified the Secretariat pursuant to Rule 24(4) that it 
intends to appear at the oral hearing may appear at the oral hearing. 
 (c) Any third party that has made a request pursuant to Rule 24(4) may, at the 
discretion of the division hearing the appeal, taking into account the requirements of due process, make an oral statement at the hearing, and respond to questions posed by the division. 
 
(4) The Presiding Member may set time-limits for oral arguments. 
  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 11 
 
 
 Annex I will be amended as follows: 
 
ANNEX I 
 
TIMETABLE FOR APPEALS1 
 
 General Appeals  Prohibited Subsidies Appeals  
 Day Day Notice of Appeal
2 0 0 
Appellant's Submission3 7  0 4 0 
Notice of Other Appeal4 12  5 6  2 
Other Appellant 's(s) Submission(s)5 15  5 7  2 
Appellee 's(s) Submission(s)6 
Third Participant 's(s) Submission(s)7 
Third Participant 's(s) Notification(s)8 25 18 
25 21 
25 21 12 9 
12 10 
12 10 
Oral Hearing9 35 30 – 45 17 15 – 23 
Circulation of Appellate Report 60 – 9010 30 – 6011 
DSB Meeting for Adoption 90 – 12012 50 – 8013 
                                                      
1Rule 17 applies to the computation of the time-periods below.  
2Rule 20. 
3Rule 21(1). 
4Rule 23(1).  
5Rule 23(3). 
6Rules 22 and 23(4). 
7Rule 24(1). 
8Rule 24(2). 
9Rule 27. 
10Article 17.5, DSU.  
11Article 4.9, SCM Agreement . 
12Article 17.14, DSU. 
13Article 4.9, SCM Agreement . WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 12  
 
  2. Filing and Service of Electronic Documents 
Rule 18 will be amended as follows: 
Documents 
 
18. (1) No document is considered filed w ith the Appellate Body unless the document is 
received by the Secretariat within the time -period set out for filing in accordance with 
these Rules. 
 
  Official versions of documents shall be s ubmitted in paper form to the Appellate 
Body Secretariat by 17:00 Geneva time on the day that the document is due.  
Participants, parties, third participants and third parties shall, by the same 
deadline, also provide to the Appellate Body Secretariat an electronic copy of 
each document.  Such electronic copy may be sent via electronic mail to the 
Appellate Body Secretariat's electronic mail address, or brought to the Appellate 
Body Secretariat on a data storage device such as a CD-ROM or USB flash 
drive.  
 
(2) Except as otherwise provided in these Rules,  every document filed by a party to the 
dispute, a participant, a third party or a third participant shall on the same day be 
served on each of the other parties to the dis pute, participants, third parties and third 
participants in the appeal , in accordance with paragraph 4 . 
 
(3) A proof of service on the other parties to the dispute, participants, third parties and 
third participants shall appear on, or be  affixed to, each document filed with the 
Secretariat under paragraph 1 above. 
 
(4) A document shall be served by the most expeditious means of delivery or 
communication available, including by: 
 
(a) delivering a copy of the document to the service address of the party to the 
dispute, participant, third party or third participant;  or 
(b) sending a copy of the document to the service address of the party to the 
dispute, participant, third party or third participant by facsimile transmission, 
expedited delivery courier or expedited mail service. 
 
Electronic copies of documents served shall also be provided on the same day, 
either by electronic mail, or through phy sical delivery of a data storage device 
containing an electronic copy of the document.  
 
(5) Upon authorization by the division, a par ticipant or a third participant may correct 
clerical errors in any of its documents (including typographical mistakes, errors of 
grammar, or words or numbers placed in th e wrong order).  The request to correct 
clerical errors shall identify the specific erro rs to be corrected and shall be filed with 
the Secretariat no later than 30 days after the date of the filing of the Notice of 
Appeal.  A copy of the request shall be served upon the other parties to the dispute, participants, third parties and third partic ipants, each of whom shall be given an 
opportunity to comment in writing on the request.  The division shall notify the parties to the dispute, participants, third par ties and third participants of its decision.   
  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 13 
 
 
 3. Technical Amendments 
Rule 6 will be amended as follows: 
Divisions 
 
6. (1) In accordance with paragraph 1 of Ar ticle 17 of the DSU, a division consisting of 
three Members shall be established to hear and decide an appeal. 
 
(2) The Members constituting a division shall be  selected on the basis of rotation, while 
taking into account the principles of random selection, unpredictability and opportunity for all Members to serve regardless of their national origin. 
 
(3) A Member selected pursuant to paragraph 2 to serve on a division shall serve on that 
division, unless: 
 
(i
a) he/she is excused from that division pursuant to Rules  9 or 10;  
(iib) he/she has notified the Chairman and the Presiding Member that he/she is 
prevented from serving on the divisi on because of illness or other serious 
reasons pursuant to Rule 12;  or 
(iiic) he/she has notified his/her intentions to resign pursuant to Rule 14.  
 Rule 32 will be amended as follows: 
Entry into Force and Amendment 
 
32. (1) These Rules shall
 enter ed into force on 15 February 1996 , and have subsequently 
been amended as indicated in Annex III . 
 
(2) The Appellate Body may amend these Ru les in compliance with the procedures set 
forth in paragraph 9 of Article 17 of the DSU .  The Appellate Body will announce 
the date on which such amendments come  into force.  The document number for 
each revised version of these Rules, and the date upon which each version 
entered into force and succeeded the p revious version, are indicated in 
Annex III.  
 
(3) Whenever there is an amendment to the DS U or to the special or additional rules and 
procedures of the covered agreements, th e Appellate Body shall examine whether 
amendments to these Rules are necessary. 
 WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 14  
 
  Annex III to the Working Procedures  will be amended as follows: 
 
ANNEX III 
 
Table of Consolidated and Revised Versions of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review  
 
Document 
Number Effective Date Rules Amended Working 
Documents/Explanat
ory Texts Minutes of Principal 
DSB Meeting(s) at 
which Amendments 
were Discussed 
WT/AB/WP/1 15 February 
1996 N/A WT/AB/WP/W/1 31 January 1996, 
WT/DSB/M/10 and 
21 February 1996, 
WT/DSB/M/11 
WT/AB/WP/2 28 February 
1997 Rule 5(2) 
and Annex II WT/AB/WP/W/2, 
WT/AB/WP/W/3 25 February 1997, 
WT/DSB/M/29 
WT/AB/WP/3 24 January 
2002 Rule 5(2) WT/AB/WP/W/4, 
WT/AB/WP/W/5 24 July 2001,  
WT/DSB/M/107 
WT/AB/WP/4 1 May 2003 Rules 24 and 27(3), 
with consequential 
amendments to 
Rules 1, 16, 18, 19, 
and 28, and Annex I WT/AB/WP/W/6, 
WT/AB/WP/W/7 23 October 2002, 
WT/DSB/M/134 
WT/AB/WP/5 1 January 2005 Rules 1, 18, 20, 21,  
23, 23 bis, and 27, and 
Annexes I and III WT/AB/WP/W/8, 
WT/AB/WP/W/9 19 May 2004, 
WT/DSB/M/169 
WT/AB/WP/6  15 September 
2010  Rules 6(3), 18(1), 
18(2), 18(4), 21(1), 
22(1), 23(1), 23(3), 
23(4), 24(1), 24(2), 
27(1), 32(1), and 
32(2), and Annexes I 
and III;  additional 
technical 
amendments to  
Spanish and French 
versions only  WT/AB/WP/W/10,  
WT/AB/WP/W/11  18 May 2010, 
WT/DSB/M/283  
  WT/AB/WP/W/11 
 Page 15 
 
 
 The following changes will be made  to the Spanish version of the Working Procedures : 
 
In Rule 1, replace "notificación" with "entrega" in the phrases "comprobante de la notificación" and "dirección a efectos de notificación".  
In paragraph 3(a) of Rule 6, replace "le" with "lo". 
 In paragraph 2 of Rule 18, replace "deben ser notificados" with "serán entregados". 
 In paragraph 3 of Rule 18, para graphs 4(a) and 4(b) of Rule 18, and paragraph 2(c) of Rule 
23, replace "notificación" with "entrega". 
 In paragraph 4 of Rule 18, replace "notificados" with "entregados". 
 In paragraph 5 of Rule 18, replace "deberá presentarse" with "se presentará", and replace 
"deberá notificar" with "entregará". 
 In paragraph 1 of Rule 21, replace "notificará" with "hará entrega de".  In paragraph 2(a) of Rule 21 and paragra ph 2(a) of Rule 22, replace "e" with "y". 
 
In paragraph 1 of Rule 22, replace "dar án traslado" with "harán entrega". 
 In paragraph 2(b)(i) of Rule 22, replace "y mencionadas" with "que se planteen".  In paragraph 2(b)(ii) of Rule 22, replace "u oposición a" with "de", change "la(s) 
comunicación(es) del(de los) apelante(s)" to "la comunicación del apelante" and insert "o la 
oposición a ellos" immediately thereafter, so that the provision reads:    
la aceptación de cada uno de los motivos alegados en la comunicación del apelante o la oposición a ellos;  
In paragraph 2(c)(i) of Rule 23, replace "al cual" with "a las cuales". 
 
In paragraph 2(c)(ii)(C) of Rule 23, replace "para" with "de".  In paragraph 3 of Rule 23 and paragraph 2 of Rule 23 bis, replace "notificará" with 
"entregará". 
 
In paragraph 4 of Rule 23, replace "deseen" with "desee", and replace "podrán" with "podrá". 
 In paragraph 6 of Rule 23, replace the second "u na" with "la", so that the first line reads 
"Cuando una parte en la diferencia que no haya presentado una comunicación de ...". 
 
In paragraph 4 of Rule 26, replace "dará traslado" with "hará entrega".   
 In paragraph 2 of Rule 27, move the last phrase of the sentence forward, replace "dentro del" 
with "en el" and replace "en otro caso" with  "si no", so that the provision reads: 
 
La Secretaría notificará, si es posible en el plan de trabajo o, si no, lo antes 
posible, la fecha de la audiencia a todas las partes en la diferencia, participantes, terceros y terceros participantes. WT/AB/WP/W/11 
Page 16  
 
  In the title to Rule 32, replace "enmiendas" with "modificación". 
 In the heading to the first column of the table in Annex III, replace "Número de" with "Signatura del". 
 
 
The following change will be made to the French version of the Working Procedures : 
 
In paragraph 2(c)(i) of Rule 23,  replace "auquel" with "auxquelles". 
 
 
___________