dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Status Report by Australia
Date: 20 September 1999
Document codes: WT/DS126/7
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF
AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Status Report by Australia
The following communication, dated 17 September 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Australia to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the
DSU.
In keeping with the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU), including Appendix 2 to the DSU, Australia wishes to inform the Dispute Settlement
Body of its progress in the implementation of the recommendations and rulings in the dispute
regarding "Australia - Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather"
(WT/DS126).
On 14 September 1999, the company concerned (Howe and Co Pty Ltd) repaid the Australian
Government $A8.065 million, an amount which covered any remaining inconsistent portion of the
grants made under the Grant Contract. The Australian Government has also terminated all subsisting
obligations under the Grant Contract.
This implements the recommendations and rulin gs in the dispute regarding "Australia -
Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather" (WT/DS126) to withdraw the
measures within 90 days.
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Constitution of the Panel Note by the Secretariat
Date: 1 November 1999
Document codes: WT/DS126/9; WT/DS126/8.; WT/DS126/8
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF
AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Constitution of the Panel
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 14 October 1999, the Disp ute Settlement Body (DSB) decided, in
accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to the original panel the matter raised by the United
States in document
2. At that DSB meeting, it was also agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference as follows:
“To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by the United States in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the
United States in that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in
making the recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those
agreements.”
3. The Panel is composed as follows:
Chairperson: H.E. Carmen Luz Guarda
Members: Mr. Jean-François Bellis
Mr. Wieslaw Karsz
4. The European Communities and Mexico have reserved their third party rights.
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 17 January 2000
Document codes: WT/DS126/10
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF
AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 13 January 2000, addressed to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated in accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU.
Article 21.5 of the DSU stipulates that a panel examining the existence or consistency with a
covered agreement of measures taken to comply with the recommendations and rulings by the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB) shall circulate its report wi thin 90 days after referral of the matter to it.
Article 21.5 further provides that when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report within 90 days, it
shall inform the DSB in writing of the reasons for the delay together with an estimate of the period
within which it will issue its report.
At its meeting of 14 October 1999, the DSB decided, in accordance with Article 21.5, to refer to
the original panel the matter raised by the United States in I wish to inform you that,
while the Panel expects to have completed its work and issued the report to the parties by
14 January 2000, that is, within the 90 days provided for in the DSU, it does not expect to be able to
circulate the report to the Members by that date due to the need for translation.
The Panel expects to be able to circulate its report to Members before the end of
January 2000.
AUSTRALIA - SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 18 June 1999
Document codes: WT/DS126/5; WT/DS126/R
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA - SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF
AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 16 June 1999, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the report on "" ().
AUSTRALIE – SUBVENTIONS ACCORDÉES AUX PRODUCTEURS ET
Rapport du Groupe spécial
À sa réunion du 16 juin 1999, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport intitulé
"Australie – Subventions accordées aux producteurs et exportateurs de cuir pour automobiles"
(WT/DS/26/R).
AUSTRALIA - SUBVENCIONES CONCEDIDAS A LOS PRODUCTORES
Y EXPORTADORES DE CUERO PARA AUTOMÓVILES
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 16 de junio de 1999, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
informe titulado "Australia - Subvenciones concedidas a los productores y exportadores de cuero para
automóviles" ().
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER - RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 21.5 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES REPORT OF THE PANEL
Document: UNITED STATES REPORT OF THE PANEL Corrigendum Please note that, due to a typographical error, there are no footnotes numbered 1 or 2 in the Panel's report, pages 1-21 of the document.  Instead, the footnote numbering, which should have started with footnote 1, starts with footnote 3.
Date: 2 February 2000
Document codes: WT/DS126/RW/Corr.1
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO
PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF
AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER -
RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 21.5 OF THE DSU BY THE
UNITED STATES
REPORT OF THE PANEL
Corrigendum
Please note that, due to a typographical error, there are no footnotes numbered 1 or 2 in the
Panel's report, pages 1-21 of the document. Instead, the footnote numbering, which should have
started with footnote 1, starts with footnote 3.
BELGIUM - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 11 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS127/1; G/SCM/D21/1; G/L/237
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Belgium
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BELGIUM - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES
CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 5 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of Belgium and to the Dispute Settlement Body is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Belgium
pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
ofDisputes,Article4.1of theAgreementonSubsidiesandCountervailing Measures (SCM Agreement),
and Article 30 of the SCM Agreement (to the extent that it incorporates by reference Article XXIII:1
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994), regarding prohibited subsidies provided by
Belgium. Based on unofficial English translations of the relevant legislation and descriptions in secondary
sources, it is the understanding of the United States that, under Belgian income tax law, Belgian corporate
taxpayers receive a special BEF 400,000 (index linked) tax exemption for recruiting a departmental
head for exports (known as an "export manager"). The United States believes that the relevant citations
with respect to this measure include, but are not limited to, the Law of 27 October 1997, (loi portant
The United States considers that this measure appears to constitute an export subsidy, and,
as such, is inconsistent with the obligations of the Government of Belgium under Article 3 of the SCM
Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
NETHERLANDS - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 11 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS128/1; G/SCM/D22/1; G/L/240
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Netherlands
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

NETHERLANDS - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES
CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 5 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated
in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of the
Netherlands pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes, Article 4.1 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
(SCM Agreement), and Article 30 of the SCM Agreement (to the extent that it incorporates by reference
Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994), regarding prohibited subsidies
provided by the Netherlands. Based on unofficial English translations of the relevant legislation and
descriptions in secondary sources, it is the understanding of the United States that, under Dutch income
tax law, exporters may establish a special "export reserve" for income derived from export sales.
The United States believes that the relevant citations with respect to this measure include, but are not
limited to, Article 13 of the Income Tax Act.
The United States considers that this measure appears to constitute an export subsidy, and,
as such, is inconsistent with the obligations of the Government of the Netherlands under Article 3 of
the SCM Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations
__________.
GREECE - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 11 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS129/1; G/SCM/D23/1; G/L/238
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Greece
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

GREECE - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES
CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 5 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of Greece and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Greece
pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
ofDisputes,Article4.1oftheAgreement onSubsidiesand CountervailingMeasures (SCM Agreement),
and Article 30 of the SCM Agreement (to the extent that it incorporates by reference Article XXIII:1
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994), regarding prohibited subsidies provided by Greece.
Based onunofficialEnglishtranslationsoftherelevantlegislationanddescriptionsinsecondarysources,
it is the understanding of the United States that, under Greek income tax law, Greek exporters are
entitled to a special annual tax deduction calculated as a percentage of export income. The United
States believes that the relevant citations with respect to this measure include, but are not limited to,
Law 2238/1994, Article 31, paragraph 2.
The United States considers that this measure appears to constitute an export subsidy, and as
such, is inconsistent with the obligations of the Government of Greece under Article 3 of the
SCM Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
IRELAND - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 11 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS130/1; G/SCM/D24/1; G/L/239
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Ireland
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

IRELAND - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES
CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 5 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of Ireland and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Ireland
pursuant to Article 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
ofDisputes,Article4.1of theAgreementonSubsidiesandCountervailing Measures (SCM Agreement),
and Article 30 of the SCM Agreement (to the extent that it incorporates by reference Article XXIII:1
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1998), regarding prohibited subsidies provided by Ireland.
Based on unofficial copies of the relevant legislation and description in secondary sources, it is the
understanding of the Untied States that, under Irish income tax law, "special trading houses" qualify
for a special tax rate in respect of trading income from the export sale of Irish-manufactured goods.
The United States believes that the relevant citations with respect to this measure include, but are not
limited to, Section 39 of the Finance Act 1980.
The United States considers that this measure appears to constitute an export subsidy, and that
the limitation to Irish-manufactured products may render the measure an import substitution subsidy.
As such, this measure appears to be inconsistent with the obligations of the Government of Ireland
under Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
FRANCE - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 11 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS131/1; G/SCM/D25/1; G/L/241
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: France
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

FRANCE - CERTAIN INCOME TAX MEASURES
CONSTITUTING SUBSIDIES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 5 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United States
to the Permanent Mission of France and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of France
pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
ofDisputes,Article4.1of theAgreementonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasures (SCM Agreement),
and Article 30 of the SCM Agreement (to the extent that it incorporates by reference Article XXIII:1
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994), regarding prohibited subsidies provided by France.
Based onunofficialEnglishtranslationsof the relevantlegislationand descriptionsinsecondarysources,
it is the understanding of the United States that, under French income tax law, a French company may
deduct, temporarily, certain start-up expenses of its foreign operations through a tax deductible reserve
account. Among the eligibility requirements for such an account are that the French company must
have established in a foreign country a branch or subsidiary that is partially owned by the French parent;
and that the branch or subsidiary must derive more than 50 per cent of its turnover from the sale of
products manufactured by the French parent. In addition, it is the understanding of the United States
that a French company also may establish a special reserve equal to 10 per cent of its receivable position
at year end for medium-term credit risks in connection with export sales. The United States believes
that the relevant citations with respect to these measures include, but are not limited to, Article 39
octiers D I to III of the French Tax Code and Article 4 bis and Article 4 ter of Annex IV of the French
Tax Code.
The United States considers that each of these measures appears to constitute an export subsidy,
and that the deduction for start-up expenses may constitute an import substitution subsidy. As such,
these practices appear to be inconsistent with the obligations of the Government of France under Article 3
of the SCM Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States
Date: 19 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS132/3; WT/DS132/2; WT/DS132/2
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States
1. At its meeting on 25 November 1998 the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a panel
pursuant to a request made by the United States ().
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference. The terms of reference are the following:
"To examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by the
United States in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the United States
in that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in making the
recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements".
3. On 13 January 1999, the Panel was constituted as follows:
Chairman: Mr. Christer Manhusen
Members: Mr. Gerald Salembier
Mr. Edwin Vermulst
4. Jamaica and Mauritius have reserved their rights as third parties to the dispute.
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU
Date: 26 April 2000
Document codes: WT/DS132/5
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU
The following communication, dated 19 April 2000, from the Permanent Missions of Mexico
and the United States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.
The Governments of Mexico and the United States hereby have the pleasure to inform you
that on 10 April 2000, pursuant to Article 21.3(b) and the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, we mutually agreed that the reasonable period of time to
implement the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in the
above-referenced dispute shall be six months and 29 days, that is from 24 February 2000 to
22 September 2000.
We would be grateful if you would ensure that this letter is circulated to the DSB.
MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Constitution of the Panel Note by the Secretariat
Date: 16 November 2000
Document codes: WT/DS132/7; WT/DS132/6.; WT/DS132/6
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Constitution of the Panel
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the Disp ute Settlement Body (DSB) decided, in
accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to the original panel the matter raised by the United
States in document
2. At that DSB meeting, it was also agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference as follows:
“To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by the United States in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the
United States in that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in
making the recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those
agreements.”
3. A member of the original Panel was unable to participate in this proceeding. The parties
agreed on a replacement on 13 November 2000. As a result, the Panel is composed as follows:
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Christer Manhusen
Members: Mr. Gerald Salembier
Mr. Paul O'Connor
4. The European Communities, Mauritius and Jamaica have reserved their rights as third parties
to the dispute.
MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 22 January 2001
Document codes: WT/DS132/8
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 22 January 2001, addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU.
Article 21.5 of the DSU stipulates that a panel shall circulate its report within 90 days after
the date of referral of the matter to it. It furt her provides that when a panel considers that it cannot
issue its report within that time, it shall inform the DSB in writing of the reasons for the delay,
together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
The matter regarding - Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU (DS 132)
was referred to a panel on 23 October 2000, and the panel was composed on 14 November 2000.
It will not, however, be possible for the Panel to complete its work within 90 days, due to the
need for translations of submissions and communications.
The Panel expects to complete its work by late May 2001.
MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 30 May 2001
Document codes: WT/DS132/9
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 29 May 2001, addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU.
Article 21.5 of the DSU stipulates that a panel shall circulate its report within 90 days after
the date of referral of the matter to it. It furt her provides that when a panel considers that it cannot
issue its report within that time, it shall inform the DSB in writing of the reasons for the delay,
together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
The matter regarding - Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU (DS 132)
was referred to a panel on 23 October 2000, and the panel was composed on 14 November 2000. On
22 January 2001, I wrote to you, indicating that due to scheduling and the time needed for translation,
the Panel would not be able to complete its work within the 90 days envisioned in Article 21.5, and
that the Panel expected to complete its work by late May 2001.
However, due to scheduling conflicts arising since my earlier letter, which prevented the
Panel from meeting as planned, it was necessary to delay issuance of the Interim Report. In light of
the time necessary to complete interim review, and allow for translation, it will not be possible for the
Panel to complete its work by late May 2001.
The Panel expects to complete its work in June 2001.
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 20 September 2001
Document codes: WT/DS132/11
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 20 September 2001, from the Chairman of the Appellate
Body addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with
Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.
I am writing to you pursuant to Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, which stipulates that, as a general rule, the Appellate Body will
circulate its report no later than 60 days after the appellant has formally notified the Dispute
Settlement Body of its decision to appeal. Article 17.5 states, furthermore, that when the
Appellate Body considers that it cannot provide its report within 60 days, it shall inform the DSB in
writing of the reasons for the delay together with an estimate of the period within which it will submit
its report.
Mexico notified the Dispute Settlement Body of its decision to appeal certain issues of law
covered in the Panel Report and legal interpretations developed by the Panel in this case on
24 July 2001, with the result that the 60-day period will expire on Monday, 24 September 2001. The
Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its Report by Monday, 24 September 2001. We estimate
that the Appellate Body Report in this appeal will be circulated to WTO Members no later than
Monday, 22 October 2001.
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 22 October 2001
Document codes: WT/DS132/12
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 22 Octobe r 2001, from Mr. Claus-Dieter Ehlermann,
Chairman of the Appellate Body, addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated in accordance with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes.
It is my honour to transmit to you the Report of the Appellate Body in Mexico – Anti-
Dumping Investigation of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) from the United States, Recourse to
Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States , It will be circulated to Members
of the today, in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Go verning the Settlement of Disputes . The three Members
of the Appellate Body who served on this appeal were: Mr. Florentino Feliciano, as Presiding
Member; Mr. Georges Michel Abi-Saab and myself, as Members.
MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 29 February 2000
Document codes: WT/DS132/4; WT/DS132/R
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the report on
"Mexico - Anti-Dumping Investigation of High Fructo se Corn Syrup (HFCS) from the United States "

MEXIQUE - ENQUÊTE ANTIDUMPING CONCERNANT LE SIROP
DE MAÏS À HAUTE TENEUR EN FRUCTOSE
Rapport du Groupe spécial
intitulé "Mexique - Enquête antidumping concernant le sirop de maïs à haute teneur en fructose en
provenance des États-Unis" ().
DE MAÍZ CON ALTA CONCENTRACIÓN DE FRUCTOSA (JMAF)
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 24 de febrero de 2000, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
de fructosa (JMAF) procedente de los Estados Unidos" ().
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body Corrigendum In document WT/DS132/4, the reference made  to WT/DS132/R is amended by adding reference to WT/DS132/R/Corr.1. MEXIQUE – ENQUÊTE ANTIDUMPING CONCERNANT LE SIROP DE MAÏS À HAUTE TENEUR EN FRUCTOSE EN PROVENANCE DES ÉTATS-UNIS Rapport du Groupe spécial Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Corrigendum Dans le document WT/DS132/4, la cote indi quée, WT/DS132/R, est complétée par mention de la cote WT/DS132/R/Corr.1. MÉXICO - INVESTIGACIÓN ANTIDUMPING SOBRE EL JARABE DE MAÍZ CON ALTA CONCENTRACIÓN DE FRUCTOSA (JMAF)
Date: 7 March 2000
Document codes: WT/DS132/4/Corr.1; WT/DS132/4; WT/DS132/R; WT/DS132/R/Corr.1.; WT/DS132/4; WT/DS132/R; WT/DS132/R/Corr.1.
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Corrigendum
In document , the reference made to is amended by adding
reference to
MEXIQUE – ENQUÊTE ANTIDUMPING CONCERNANT LE SIROP
DE MAÏS À HAUTE TENEUR EN FRUCTOSE
Rapport du Groupe spécial
Corrigendum
de la cote
DE MAÍZ CON ALTA CONCENTRACIÓN DE FRUCTOSA (JMAF)
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
Corrigendum
MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES REPORT OF THE PANEL
Document: Corrigendum The Note by the Secretariat at the foot of page 1 should read: "This Panel Report shall be adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) within 60 days …" and not 30 days as shown.
Date: 25 February 2000
Document codes: WT/DS132/R/Corr.1
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
REPORT OF THE PANEL
Corrigendum
The Note by the Secretariat at the foot of page 1 should read:
"This Panel Report shall be adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) within
60 days …"
and not 30 days as shown.
MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU Action by the Dispute Settlement Body On 21 November 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body Report on "Mexico – Anti-Dumping Investigation of High Fruc tose Corn Syrup (HFCS) from the United States: Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States" (WT/DS132/AB/RW) and the Panel Report (WT/DS132/RW), as upheld by the Appellate Body Report.  The Panel Report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body Report. MEXIQUE - ENQUÊTE ANTIDUMPING CONCERNANT LE SIROP DE MAÏS À HAUTE TENEUR EN FRUCTOSE (SHTF) EN PROVENANCE DES ÉTATS-UNIS Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial au titre de l'article 21:5 du Mémorandum d'accord sur le règlement des différends Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Le 21 novembre 2001, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel sur l'affaire " Mexique -  Enquête antidumping concernant le sirop de maïs à haute teneur en
Date: 26 November 2001
Document codes: WT/DS132/13; WT/DS132/AB/RW; WT/DS132/RW
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: Jamaica, Mauritius, EU
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12  Anti-dumping

MEXICO - ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION OF HIGH FRUCTOSE
CORN SYRUP (HFCS) FROM THE UNITED STATES
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
On 21 November 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body Report on
"Mexico – Anti-Dumping Investigation of High Fruc tose Corn Syrup (HFCS) from the United States:
Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States" () and the Panel Report
(), as upheld by the Appellate Body Report. The Panel Report should be read in
conjunction with the Appellate Body Report.
MEXIQUE - ENQUÊTE ANTIDUMPING CONCERNANT LE SIROP DE MAÏS
À HAUTE TENEUR EN FRUCTOSE (SHTF) EN
PROVENANCE DES ÉTATS-UNIS
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial au titre de l'article 21:5
d'appel sur l'affaire " Mexique - Enquête antidumping concernant le sirop de maïs à haute teneur en
est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel.
MAÍZ CON ALTA CONCENTRACIÓN DE FRUCTOSA
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
concentración de fructosa (JMAF) procedente de los Estados Unidos - Recurso de los Estados Unidos
SLOVAK REPUBLIC - MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION OF DAIRY PRODUCTS AND THE TRANSIT OF CATTLE
Document: Request for Consultations by Switzerland
Date: 18 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS133/1; G/L/243; G/SPS/GEN/71; G/LIC/D/22
Complainant: Switzerland
Respondent: Slovak Republic
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, III, V, X, XI  GATT 1994Art. 5  Import LicensingArt. 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

SLOVAK REPUBLIC - MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION
OF DAIRY PRODUCTS AND THE TRANSIT OF CATTLE
Request for Consultations by Switzerland
The following communication, dated 7 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Switzerland
to the Permanent Mission of the Slovak Republic and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated
in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Slovak Republic pursuant
to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes,
Article XXII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), Article 11 of
the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ("SPS Agreement") and
Article6 oftheAgreement onImport LicensingProcedures("Import LicensingAgreement")concerning
Slovak regulations on the importation of dairy products and the transit of cattle, pursuant to
Decree No. 4/1996 of 2 July 1996 (Prikazny list cislo 4/1996) based on Decision No. 458 of
25 June 1996of the Government of the Slovak Republic (Uznesenia C.458). These measures are having
an adverse effect on Swiss cheese and cattle exports.
It would appear that some of these measures are not consistent with the Slovak Republic's
obligations under Articles I, III, V, X and XI of GATT 1994. It would also seem that these measures
are not consistent withArticle 5 of the SPS Agreement and Article5 of the Import Licensing Agreement.
Switzerland reserves the right to present additional facts and arguments during the consultations.
I look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to setting a mutually convenient date
for the consultations. We suggest that we meet during the week of 26 June 1998.
SLOVAK REPUBLIC - MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION OF DAIRY PRODUCTS AND THE TRANSIT OF CATTLE
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States
Date: 3 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS133/2
Complainant: Switzerland
Respondent: Slovak Republic
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, III, V, X, XI  GATT 1994Art. 5  Import LicensingArt. 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

SLOVAK REPUBLIC - MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION
OF DAIRY PRODUCTS AND THE TRANSIT OF CATTLE
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 28 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Permanent Mission of the Slovak Republic, the Permanent Mission of
Switzerland and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the
DSU.
Pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, the United States Government hereby notifies the Government
of the Slovak Republic that it desires to be joined in the consultations requested by Switzerland in a
communication circulated to WTO Members on 18 May 1998 () entitled “”.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN IMPORT DUTIES ON RICE
Document: Corrigendum In paragraph 1 of document WT/DS134/1, G/L/245, G/VAL/D/1, G/LIC/D/23, G/AG/GEN/24, G/TBT/D/16, G/SPS/GEN/73, dated 8 June 1998, Article XXII of GATT 1994 should read as Article XXIII of GATT 1994.
Date: 19 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS134/1/Corr.1; WT/DS134/1; G/L/245/Corr.1; G/VAL/D/1/Corr.1; G/LIC/D/23/Corr.1; G/AG/GEN/24/Corr.1; G/TBT/D/16/Corr.1; G/SPS/GEN/73/Corr.1; G/L/245; G/VAL/D/1; G/LIC/D/23; G/AG/GEN/24; G/TBT/D/16; G/SPS/GEN/73
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, China, Taiwan, EU, New Zealand
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. XI  GATT 1994Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. 5.5, 5.6, 6.1, 6.2, 7, Annex B  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – RESTRICTIONS ON
CERTAIN IMPORT DUTIES ON RICE
Corrigendum
In paragraph 1 of document , , , ,
, , , dated 8 June 1998, Article XXII of GATT 1994
should read as Article XXIII of GATT 1994.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Document: Request for Consultations by Canada
Date: 3 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS135/1; G/SPS/GEN/72; G/TBT/D/15
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Brazil, Zimbabwe, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. III, XI, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS
AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Request for Consultations by Canada
The following request, dated 28 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Canada to the
Permanent Delegation of the European Commission a nd to the Dispute Settlement Body is circulated
in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
Pursuant to Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Article 11 of
the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, and Article 14 of the
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, the Government of Canada requests consultations with the
European Communities concerning certain measures taken by France for the prohibition of asbestos
and products containing asbestos. These measures include, but are not limited to, Decree No. 96-1133
of 24 December 1996 banning asbestos, issued pursuant to the Labour Code and the Consumer Code,
as amended.
The Decree prohibits, among other things, the manufacture, processing, import, placing on the
domestic market, possession for sale, offering, sale or transfer on any ground all varieties of asbestos
fibres and any product containing asbestos fibres. The Government of Canada maintains that these
measures are incompatible with France's obligations under the above-mentioned Agreements because
they infringe, among other provisions, the following Articles:
(i) Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures;
(ii) Article 2 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade;
(iii) Articles III, XI and XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.
Moreover, the measures nullify or impair the benefits accruing to Canada under these
Agreements.
In accordance with Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes, the Government of Ca nada requests consultations with the European
Communities with the intention of reaching a mutually satisfactory result. The Government of
Canada will consider any suggestion from the European Communities concerning the date on which
these consultations could take place.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Brazil
Date: 19 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS135/2
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Brazil, Zimbabwe, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. III, XI, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS
AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Brazil
The following communication, dated 12 June 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Brazil to
the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU, I inform you that the Government of Brazil, due to its
substantial trade interest, wishes to be joined in the consultations under Article XXII of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Article 11 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures and Article 14 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade requested by
the Government of Canada, in letter dated 28 May 1998 (). Such consultations refer to
certain measures taken by France for the prohibition of asbestos and products containing asbestos.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Canada Note by the Secretariat
Date: 1 April 1999
Document codes: WT/DS135/4; WT/DS135/3; WT/DS135/3
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Brazil, Zimbabwe, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. III, XI, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING
ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Canada
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 25 November 1998 the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a Panel
pursuant to a request made by Canada ().
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference. The terms of reference are the following:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by
Canada in document , the matter referred to the DSB by Canada in that
document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in making the recommendations
or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements".
3. On 29 March 1999, the Panel was constituted as follows:
President: Mr. Adrian Macey
Members: Mr. William Ehlers
Mr. Åke Lindén
4. Brazil, the United States and Zimbabwe have reserved their rights as third parties to the
dispute.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 27 September 1999
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Brazil, Zimbabwe, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. III, XI, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

WT/DS/135/5

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS
AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 22 September 1999 and addressed to the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the DSU.
Article 12.8 of the DSU stipulates that the period in which a panel shall conduct its
examination, from the date that the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed
upon until the date the final report is issued to the parties shall, as a general rule, not exceed six
months. Pursuant to Article 12.9 of the DSU, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the DSB in wri ting of the reasons for the delay together with an
estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
 The Panel on "European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products
Containing Asbestos" was established by the DSB on 25 November 1998, and its composition and
terms of reference were determined on 29 March 1999. I wish to inform you that the Panel has not
been able to complete its work within the six months provided for in the DSU. The complex nature of
the matter and the need to seek technical and scientific expertise pursuant to Article 13 of the DSU are
responsible for this delay.
The Panel intends to finalize its work by March 2000.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 7 March 2000
Document codes: WT/DS135/6
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Brazil, Zimbabwe, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. III, XI, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING ASBESTOS
AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING ASBESTOS
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 3 March 2000 and addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the DSU.
On behalf of the aforementioned Panel, I woul d like to address the following communication
to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB).
Article 12.8 of the DSU stipulates that the period in which a panel shall conduct its
examination, from the date that the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed
upon until the date the final report is issued to the parties shall, as a general rule, not exceed six
months. Pursuant to Article 12.9 of the DSU, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the DSB in wri ting of the reasons for the delay together with an
estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
The Panel on "" was established by the DSB on 25 November 1998, and its composition and
terms of reference were determined on 29 March 1999. In a letter dated 22 September 1999, the
Panel informed the DSB that it was not able to comp lete its work within the six months provided for
in the DSU and expected to finalize its report by March 2000 (see document ). The
Panel wishes now to inform the DSB that it will need more time to complete its report.
The Panel intends to issue its final report to the parties in June 2000.