RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/DSB/M/31
12May1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1979)
Dispute Settlement Body
10April 1997
MINUTES OFMEETING
Held intheCentre William Rappard
on10April 1997
Chairman: Mr.Wade Armstrong (New Zealand)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. European Communities -Duties onimports ofgrains 1
- Request bytheUnited States fortheestablishment ofapanel 1
2. United States -Import prohibition ofcertain shrimp andshrimp products 2
- Request byIndia fortheestablishment ofapanel 2
3. Australia -Measures affecting importation ofsalmon 3
- Request byCanada fortheestablishment ofapanel 3
4. United States -Restrictions onimports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear 3
- Statement bytheUnited States 3
1. European Communities -Duties onimports ofgrains
- Request bytheUnited States fortheestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS13/6)
TheChairman drew attention tothecommunication from theUnited States contained in
WT/DS13/6.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthatthisdispute hadalonghistory, andhiscountry
regretted thatrepeated requests forapanel toexamine thismatter hadtaken somuch oftheDSB's
time. Duetotheinterpretations oftheDispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) given bycertain
delegations, theUnited States wasleftwithnochoice buttopreserve itsprocedural rights. Therefore,
ithadrepeatedlyrequestedtheinclusionofthismatterontheDSB'sagendawhilesimultaneouslyworking
toward itsresolution. Currently theUnited States andtheEuropean Communities weremaking good
progress tothisend.Inlightofthisprogress, hisdelegation hadbeeninformed priortothismeeting,
thattheCommunities would notbeinaposition toagree totheestablishment ofapanel atthepresent
meeting. Hisdelegation accepted thisposition andhoped thattheprogress todatewould continue
andthat,atthenextDSBmeeting on30April when thisrequest would appear ontheagenda forthe
second time, theUnited States would beabletoreport thatthematter hadbeensettled andwould
withdraw itsrequest.WT/DSB/M/31
Page2
TherepresentativeoftheEuropeanCommunitiessaidthathisdelegationwassomewhatconfused
bytheprocedural changes made bytheUnited States withregard tothismatter, andwasreflecting
ontheimplications thereof. TheCommunities hadworked withtheUnited States toresolve thismatter
anditwashisunderstanding thatasolution waswithin sightsothat,atthenextDSBmeeting, itwould
bepossible toreport tothateffect.
TheDSBtooknoteofthestatements andagreed torevert tothismatter atitsnextmeeting
tobeheldon30April.
2. United States -Import prohibition ofcertain shrimp andshrimp products
- Request byIndia fortheestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS58/8)
TheChairmanrecalledthattheDSBhadconsideredthismatteratitsmeetingon20March1997,
andhadagreed torevert toit.ThisitemwasontheAgenda ofthepresent meeting attherequest of
India. Hedrewattention todocument WT/DS58/8 which contained India'srequest fortheestablishment
ofapanel.
Therepresentative ofIndiareiterated hiscountry 'srequest forapanel toexamine theUSimport
prohibition ofcertain shrimp andshrimp products. Herecalled thatthisrequest hadbeenmade at
theDSBmeeting on20March. Inaccordance withArticle 6oftheDSU hisdelegation requested
thatapanel beestablished atthepresent meeting.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthatbecause theissues raised inIndia'srequest
were among those covered intherequest byMalaysia andThailand, andinthesubsequent request
byPakistan, hisdelegation believed thatthesame panel should consider thematters raised byallfour
countries. Therefore, theDSBshould agree toestablish apanel asrequested byIndia atthepresent
meeting inaccordance withArticle 6.1oftheDSU, andpursuant toArticle 9.1oftheDSU, thispanel
should beconsolidated withthePanel already established attherequests oftheabove-mentioned
countries.
Therepresentative ofIndia welcomed theUnited States agreement toestablish thepanel at
thepresent meeting. Hisdelegation agreed withtheUSproposal concerning theconsolidation ofthe
panels pursuant toArticle 9.1oftheDSU, ontheunderstanding thatthesame terms ofreference of
thePanel established attherequests ofMalaysia, Thailand andPakistan would apply inthiscase.
TheDSBtooknoteofthestatements andagreed toestablish apanel asrequested byIndia with
standard terms ofreference, andthatpursuant toArticle 9oftheDSU inrespect ofmultiple
complainants, thePanel established on25February 1997 toexamine thecomplaints byMalaysia,
Thailand andPakistan would alsoexamine India'scomplaint ascontained inWT/DS58/8.
Inaddition tothose delegations thathadreserved theirthird-party rights toparticipate inthe
Panel established attherequests ofMalaysia, Thailand andPakistan1,therepresentative ofVenezuela
reserved hisGovernment 'sthird-party rights toparticipate inthePanel proceedings.
1Australia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, theEuropean Communities, Guatemala, Hong Kong, India,
Japan, Mexico, Nigeria, thePhilippines, Senegal, Singapore, andSriLanka. After themeeting ElSalvador
reserved itsthird-party rights toparticipate inthePanel proceedings.WT/DSB/M/31
Page3
3. Australia -Measures affecting importation ofsalmon
- Request byCanada fortheestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS18/2)
TheChairman recalled thattheDSBhadconsidered thismatter atitsmeeting on20March 1997
andhadagreed torevert toit.ItwasontheAgenda ofthepresent meeting attherequest ofCanada.
Hedrew attention todocument WT/DS18/2 containing Canada 'srequest fortheestablishment ofa
panel.
Therepresentative ofCanada saidthatattheDSBmeeting on20March, Australia hadnot
agreed tojointheconsensus toestablish apanel withregard tosome ofitsmeasures affecting the
importation ofsalmon. Canada continued toviewthese measures asunjustified andinconsistent with
Australia 'sobligations under theWTO Agreement. Therefore, forthesecond time, herdelegation
requested thattheDSBestablish apanel withstandard terms ofreference assetoutinArticle 7of
theDSU.
Therepresentative ofAustralia recalled hisdelegation 'sstatement made attheDSBmeeting
on20March. Australia regretted thatCanada hadproceeded towards apanel without undertaking
adiscussion ontheDecember 1996 salmon import riskassessment. Hisdelegation needed further
timetoassess thequestion ofstandard orspecial terms ofreference forthepanel andtherefore itwished
totakeadvantage ofthe20-day period allowed under Article 7.1oftheDSU.
TherepresentativeofCanadasaidthat,asmentionedatthepreviousDSBmeeting,herdelegation
considered thatCanada haddemonstrated agreat dealofpatience withregard tothismatter. The
restrictive measures inquestion were stillinforce without anypossibility ofresolving thisdispute.
Therefore, Canada wasrequesting apanel forthesecond time. TheAustralian statement wasthefirst
indication forCanada thatthere might beanissue withrespect totheadoption ofthestandard terms
ofreference forthispanel. Australia hadnotprovided Canada withanysubstantive reasons whyit
could notaccept thestandard terms ofreference. Proceeding inthismanner wascertainly notthemost
efficient useofthedispute settlement system noroftheDSB'stime. Herdelegation continued tobelieve
thatthepanel should havethestandard terms ofreference.
TheDSBtooknoteofthestatements andagreed toestablish apanel inaccordance withthe
provisions ofArticle 6oftheDSU, itbeing understood that,iftheparties could notagree ontheterms
ofreference forthePanel, thestandard terms ofreference asprovided forinArticle 7.1oftheDSU
would apply.
TherepresentativesoftheEuropeanCommunitiesandtheUnitedStatesreservedtheirthird-party
rights toparticipate inthePanel proceedings.2
4. United States -Restrictions onimports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear
- Statement bytheUnited States
Therepresentative oftheUnited States, speaking under "Other Business", recalled thathis
delegation hadinformed theDSBatitsmeeting on20March 1997thatitintended tomeetitsobligations
under theWTO Agreement withrespect tothismatter.3Heconfirmed thatthemeasure atissue had
expired without extension on28March 1997. TheUnited States wasthusmeeting itsobligations under
2After themeeting India andNorway reserved theirthird-party rights toparticipate inthePanel proceedings.
3TheDSBadoptedtheAppellateBodyReportandthePanelReporton"UnitedStates-RestrictionsonImports
ofCotton andMan-made Fibre Underwear" atitsmeeting on25February 1997 (WT/DS24/8).WT/DSB/M/31
Page4
theWTO Agreement withrespect tothismatter. Accordingly, itwashisauthorities 'understanding
-anunderstanding thattheUnited States trusted wasshared byCosta Rica-thatthematter before
theDSBhadbeenconcluded, andthatitwould nolonger appear ontheDSB'sagenda.
Therepresentative ofCosta Ricawelcomed theUSannouncement onitscompliance withthe
DSB'srecommendations. However, Costa Ricawasconcerned withregard toaletterof26March 1997
fromtheUSGovernment toitscustoms authorities, twodaysbefore theexpiry ofthequota referred
tobytheUnited States. Thisletter requested themonitoring ofimports fromCosta Ricaofproducts
falling within thetextile category which hadbeenthesubject ofthePanel Report, inanticipation of
theestablishment ofaquota. Hebelieved thatitwasimportant tohaveaclarification withrespect
toapossible re-establishment ofthequota andheasked theUnited States forthisclarification.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthattheCosta Rican delegation hadalerted his
delegation inadvance ofthemeeting ofitsGovernment 'sconcern. Heconfirmed thattheletter referred
tobyCosta Ricadidnotrepresent, norshould itbeinterpreted asanextension ofthemeasure that
hadbeenexamined bythePanel andtheAppellate Body. Thatmeasure hadexpired definitively.
Therepresentative ofCosta Ricanoted theexplanation provided bytheUnited States. His
delegation agreed thattheitemconcerning compliance withtherecommendations onthismatter would
nolonger appear ontheDSB'sagenda. However, hereserved therighttorequest theinclusion of
thisitemonafuture agenda iftherestrictions referred tobytheUnited States intheletter toitscustoms
authorities were tobeapplied.
TheDSBtooknoteofthestatements.