dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Chinese Taipei
Date: 1 August 2007
Document codes: WT/DS366/4
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from Chinese Taipei

 The following communication, dated 27 July 2007, from the delegation of Chinese Taipei to
the delegation of Colombia, the delegation of Panama and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes (DSU), the Government of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu,
Kinmen and Matsu hereby notifies the Consulting Parties and the Dispute Settlement Body that it
wishes to join in the consultations requested by Pa nama regarding Indicative Prices and Restrictions
on Ports of Entry. Panama's request for cons ultations, pursuant to Articles 4 of the DSU,
Article XXII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs an d Trade 1994, and Article 19.1 and 19.2 of the
Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994, was circulated on 17 July 2007 in
document

 The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Pe nghu, Kinmen and Matsu has substantial trade
interest as well as systemic interest in this matter. We would apprecia te the Consulting Parties
informing us of the date and venue of the consultations so as to enable our participation.
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Acceptance by Colombia of the Requests to Join Consultations Guatemala, Honduras and Chinese Taipei notif ied the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consultations re quested by Panama, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU. The delegation of Colombia informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Guatemala, Honduras and Chinese Taipei to join the consultations.
Date: 6 August 2007
Document codes: WT/DS366/5
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Acceptance by Colombia of the Requests to Join Consultations

 Guatemala, Honduras and Chinese Taipei notif ied the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of
their desire to be joined in the consultations re quested by Panama, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the
DSU.

 The delegation of Colombia informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Guatemala,
Honduras and Chinese Taipei to join the consultations.

COLOMBIE – PRIX INDICATIFS ET RESTRICTIONS RELATIVES
AUX BUREAUX D'ENTRÉE

COLOMBIA - PRECIOS INDICATIVOS Y RESTRICCIONES

 Guatemala, Honduras y el Taipei Chino notif icaron al Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Panama Note by the Secretariat
Date: 11 February 2008
Document codes: WT/DS366/7; WT/DS366/6
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Panama

Note by the Secretariat

1. At its meeting on 22 October 2007, the Disput e Settlement Body (DSB ) established a panel
pursuant to the request of Panama in document WT /DS366/6, in accordance with Article 6 of the
DSU (WT/DSB/M/241).

2. The Panel's terms of reference are the following:

"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by Panama in document , the ma tter referred to the DSB by Panama 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 parties agreed to the following composition of the Panel effective as of 8 February 2008:

Chairman: Mr. Gary Horlick

 Members: Mr. Gonzalo Biggs
 Mr. Miguel Rodriguez Mendoza

4. China, Ecuador, the European Communities, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Chinese Taipei,
Turkey and the United States have reserved their rights to participate in the Panel proceedings as third
parties.
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 15 September 2008
Document codes: WT/DS366/8
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Communication from the Chairman of the Panel

 The following communication, dated 9 September 2008, addressed to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the Dispute
Settlement Understanding (DSU).

 Article 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) provides that the period in which a pa nel 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 to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.

 Article 12.9 of the DSU provides that, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) in writing of the reasons for the
delay, together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.

 The Panel on (WT/DS366)
was established by the DSB on 22 October 2007, and composed on 8 February 2008.

 Due to scheduling difficulties and translation issues presented in this case, however, the Panel
will not be able to complete its work within six m onths from the date of the Panel's composition. The
Panel expects to issue its final report to the parties to the dispute early in 2009.
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Appointment of Arbitrator by the Director-General under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes Note by the Secretariat On 30 July 2009, pursuant to the request received on 24 July 2009 from Panama, the Director-General appointed Mr. Giorgio Sacerdoti to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes in the matter Colombia – Indicative Prices and Restrictions on Ports of Entry .  Mr. Sacerdoti accepted this appointment by letter dated 3 August 2009 to Panama and Colombia.
Date: 4 August 2009
Document codes: WT/DS366/11
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Appointment of Arbitrator by the Director-General under Article 21.3(c) of the

Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes

Note by the Secretariat

 On 30 July 2009, pursuant to the request received on 24 July 2009 from Panama, the
Director-General appointed Mr. Giorgio Sacerdoti to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes in the matter . Mr. Sacerdoti accepted this appointment by
letter dated 3 August 2009 to Panama and Colombia.
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Extension of Time Period under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
Date: 28 August 2009
Document codes: WT/DS366/12
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Extension of Time Period under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU

 The following communication, dated 31 July 2009, from the delegation of Panama and the
delegation of Colombia to the Arbitrator and th e Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated in accordance with Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.

 Article 21.3(c) of the DSU provides that, in the absence of an agreement between the parties
on a period of time, the reasonable period of time shall be determined "t hrough binding arbitration
within 90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings." Colombia and
Panama hereby confirm that any award of the arbitr ator (including awards not made within 90 days
after the date of adoption of the recommendations a nd rulings) shall be deemed to be an award of the
arbitrator for the purposes of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in determining the reasonable period of time
for Colombia to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.
COLOMBIA - INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 25 May 2009
Document codes: WT/DS366/9; WT/DS366/R; WT/DS366/R/Corr.1; WT/DS366/R; WT/DS366/R/Corr.1
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA - INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Panel Report

Action by the Dispute Settlement Body

 At its meeting on 20 May 2009, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Panel report
( and ).

COLOMBIE - PRIX INDICATIFS ET RESTRICTIONS

Rapport du Groupe spécial

Groupe spécial ( et ).

COLOMBIA - PRECIOS INDICATIVOS Y RESTRICCIONES

Informe del Grupo Especial

Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias

 En su reunión de 20 de mayo de 2009, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Report of the Panel Corrigendum Paragraph 6.1 should read as follows: "On 4 March 2009, the Panel issued its Interim Report to the parties.  On
Date: 6 May 2009
Document codes: WT/DS366/R/Corr.1
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Report of the Panel

Corrigendum

Paragraph 6.1 should read as follows:

"On 4 March 2009, the Panel issued its Interim Report to the parties. On
18 March 2009, both parties submitted written requests for the review of precise
aspects of the Interim Report. The parties submitted written comments on the other
party's comments on 25 March 2009. Neither party requested an interim review
meeting."
COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS ON PORTS OF ENTRY
Document: Request by Panama for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
Date: 9 July 2009
Document codes: WT/DS366/10; WT/DS366/R; WT/DS366/R/Corr.1
Complainant: Panama
Respondent: Colombia
Third parties: China, Ecuador, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Taiwan, Turkey, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13  Customs valuationArt. VII, VII:1, III:2, X:3(a), XIII:1, V:6  GATT 1994

COLOMBIA – INDICATIVE PRICES AND RESTRICTIONS
ON PORTS OF ENTRY

Request by Panama for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU

 The following communication, dated 7 July 2009, from the delegation of Panama to the
Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.

On 20 May 2009, the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted the rulings and
recommendations of the Panel in
(, ). At the DSB m eeting held on 19 June 2009, Colombia stated
that it intended to implement the rulings and r ecommendations of the DSB in accordance with the
panel report, and requested a reasonable period of time to do so.

Pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Panama has held consultations with Colombia aimed at reaching a
mutually agreed reasonable period of time for impl ementation of the rulings and recommendations of
the panel report. However, the parties have not be en able to reach an agreement. Accordingly,
Panama requests that the reasonable period of ti me be determined through binding arbitration
pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.

Panama is looking forward to consulting with Colombia on the appointment of the arbitrator
within the next ten days, as provided in footnote 12 of the DSU.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the European Communities
Date: 14 September 2007
Document codes: WT/DS367/2
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from the European Communities

 The following communication, dated 13 Sept ember 2007, from the delegation of the
European Communities to the delegation of Austra lia, the delegation of New Zealand and to the
Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes , the European Communities hereby notifi es the Governments of Australia, of
New Zealand and the Dispute Settlement Body that, in the light of the substantial trade interest of the
European Communities, it desires to be joined in the consultations requested by New Zealand in a
communication circulated to WTO Members on 4 September 2007 (, ,
) entitled .

 The EC is a major importer and exporter of agricultural goods. At the same time, the EC
attaches great importance to human, animal or pl ant health and has instituted a comprehensive
science-based system to ensure the safety of the food chain. The European Communities thus has a
substantial trade interest in the present dis pute and in the correct implementation of the Agreement on
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States
Date: 18 September 2007
Document codes: WT/DS367/3; WT/DS367/1
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from the United States

 The following communication, dated 14 Sept ember 2007, from the delegation of the
United States to the delegation of Australia, the de legation of New Zealand and to the Chairman of
the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

This concerns the request for cons ultations by New Zealand regarding , circulated on 4 September 2007
(). My authorities have instructed me to notify the consulting Members and the Dispute
Settlement Body of the desire of the United States to be joined in these consultations, pursuant to
Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.

The United States has a substantial trade inter est in these consultations. US apple exports
accounted for 16% of world trade in apples by volume in 2006. From July 2006 to June 2007, the
United States exported 636,000 me tric tons of apples, worth over $600 million. However, apples
from the United States are prohibited from importati on into Australia just as New Zealand's apples
were until the recent restrictions were imposed. The phytosanitary measures specified in Biosecurity
Australia (2006) Final Import Risk Analysis Report for Apples from New Zealand appear to be
directed at risks that also form the basis for Australia's prohibition on the importation of US apples.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations The European Communities and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the cons ultations requested by New Zealand, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU. The delegation of Australia informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of the European Communities and the United States to join the consultations. AUSTRALIE – MESURES AFFECTANT L'IMPORTATION DE POMMES EN PROVENANCE DE NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE
Date: 1 October 2007
Document codes: WT/DS367/4
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations

 The European Communities and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body
(DSB) of their desire to be joined in the cons ultations requested by New Zealand, pursuant to
Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 The delegation of Australia informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of the
European Communities and the United States to join the consultations.

AUSTRALIE – MESURES AFFECTANT L'IMPORTATION DE POMMES
EN PROVENANCE DE NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE

différends.

 La délégation de l'Australie a informé l'ORD qu'elle avait accepté les demandes de

DE MANZANAS PROCEDENTES DE NUEVA ZELANDIA

 Las Comunidades Europeas y los Estados Unidos notificaron al Órgano de Solución de
Diferencias (OSD) su deseo de ser asociados a las consultas solicitadas por Nueva Zelandia, de
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of New Zealand Note by the Secretariat
Date: 13 March 2008
Document codes: WT/DS367/6; WT/DS367/5; WT/DS367/5
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of New Zealand

Note by the Secretariat

1. At its meeting on 21 January 2008, the Di spute Settlement Body (DSB) established a panel
pursuant to the request of New Zealand in document , in accordance with Article 6 of the
DSU (WT/DSB/M/245).

2. The Panel's terms of reference are the following:

"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by New Zealand in document , the matter referred to the DSB by
New Zealand in that document, and to ma ke such findings as will assist the DSB in
making the recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those
agreements."
3. On 3 March 2008, New Zealand requested the Director-General to determine the composition
of the panel, pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article 8 of the DSU. This paragraph provides:

"If there is no agreement on the panelists within 20 days after the date of the
establishment of a panel, at the request of either party, the Director-General, in
consultation with the Chairman of the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council
or Committee, shall determine the com position of the panel by appointing the
panelists whom the Director-General consid ers most appropriate in accordance with
any relevant special or additional rules or procedures of the covered agreement or
covered agreements which are at issue in th e dispute, after consulting with the parties
to the dispute. The Chairman of th e DSB shall inform the Members of the
composition of the panel thus formed no later than 10 days after the date the
Chairman receives such a request."
4. On 12 March 2008, the Director-General accordingly composed the Panel as follows:

Chairman: Mr. P.J.A. (Attie) Swart

 Members: Mr. William Ehlers
 Ms. Kirsten Hillman

5. Chile, the European Communities, Japan, Paki stan, Chinese Taipei and the United States have
reserved their rights to participate in the Panel proceedings as third parties.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 23 September 2008
Document codes: WT/DS367/8
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from the Chairman of the Panel

 The following communication, dated 19 September 2008, addressed to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the Dispute
Settlement Understanding (DSU).

 Article 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) provides that the period in which a pa nel 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 to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.

 Article 12.9 of the DSU provides that, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) in writing of the reasons for the
delay, together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.

 The Panel on
(WT/DS367) was established by the DSB on 21 January 2008, and composed by the Director-General
on 12 March 2008.

 Due to the nature and scope of the dispute, including the Panel's decision to seek scientific
and technical expert advice pursuant to Article 11 of the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures and Article 13 of the DSU, the Panel expects to issue its final report to the parties by
July 2009, as envisaged in the timetable adopted after consultations with the Parties.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 29 June 2009
Document codes: WT/DS367/9
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from the Chairman of the Panel

 The following communication, dated 22 June 2009 , addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated in accordan ce with Article 12.9 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding (DSU).

 Article 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) provides that the period in which a pa nel 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 to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.

 Article 12.9 of the DSU provides that, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) in writing of the reasons for the
delay, together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.

 The Panel on
(WT/DS367) was established by the DSB on 21 January 2008, and composed by the Director-General
on 12 March 2008.

 In its communication of 19 September 2008, the Panel indicated that it expected to issue its
final report to the Parties by July 2009. Howeve r, as a result of the time required for the expert
consultation process, including the time needed to iden tify and select experts, to prepare the questions
for the experts in consultation with the Parties; the time required by experts to prepare their responses
and the time provided to Parties to comment on these responses, it will not be possible for the Panel to
issue its final report to the Parties by July 2009. The Panel estimates that it will issue its final report
to the Parties by January 2010, as envisaged in th e revised timetable adopted after consultation with
the Parties.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 29 January 2010
Document codes: WT/DS367/10
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from the Chairman of the Panel

 The following communication, dated 29 January 2010, addressed to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the Dispute
Settlement Understanding (DSU).

 Article 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) provides that the period in which a pa nel 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 to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.

 Article 12.9 of the DSU provides that, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) in writing of the reasons for the
delay, together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.

 The Panel on
(WT/DS367) was established by the DSB on 21 January 2008, and composed by the Director-General
on 12 March 2008.

 In its communication of 22 June 2009, the Panel indicated that it expected to issue its final
report to the Parties by January 2010. However, due to the technical complexity of the issues and the
volume of material to be reviewed, the Panel will not be in a position to issue the final report in
January 2010. The Panel estimate s that it will issue its final repor t to the Parties by May 2010, as
envisaged in the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the Parties.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Notification of an Appeal by Australia under Article 16.4 and Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), and under Rule 20(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review Corrigendum By letter of 16 September 2010, Australia re quested authorization from the Appellate Body,
Date: 27 September 2010
Document codes: WT/DS367/13/Corr.1
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION
OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND

Notification of an Appeal by Australia

under Article 16.4 and Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU),
and under Rule 20(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review

Corrigendum

 By letter of 16 September 2010, Australia re quested authorization from the Appellate Body,
pursuant to Rule 18(5) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review , to amend its Notice of
Appeal dated 31 August 2010. No objections to Australia's request were received from New Zealand,
the third parties or the third participants. On 23 September 2010, the Division hearing the appeal
authorized Australia to amend its Notice of Appeal.

 Consequently, the reference to "[8.1](d)" in the first line of paragraph 2(d) should read
"[8.1](e)".
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Notification of an Other Appeal by New Zealand under Article 16.4 and Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), and under Rule 23(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review
Date: 15 September 2010
Document codes: WT/DS367/14
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF
APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND

Notification of an Other Appeal by New Zealand

under Article 16.4 and Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU),
and under Rule 23(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review

 The following notification, dated 13 Septembe r 2010, from the Delegation of New Zealand, is
being circulated to Members.

Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU") and Rule 23(1) of the Working
Procedures for Appellate Review , New Zealand hereby notifies its decision to appeal to the
Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in the Panel Report in () ("Panel Report") and
certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
2. New Zealand seeks review by the Appellate Body of the Panel's legal conclusion that
New Zealand's claim under Annex C(1)(a) and its consequential claim under Article 8 of the
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ("SPS Agreement ")
are outside of the Pane l's terms of reference.
1 This conclusion is in error and is based on an
erroneous interpretation and appli cation of Annex C(1)(a) of the SPS Agreement and
Article 6.2 of the DSU.2

1Panel Report, para. 8.1(f).
2Panel Report, paras. 7.1443 to 7.1490.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 11 November 2010
Document codes: WT/DS367/15
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION
OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from the Appellate Body

 The following communication, dated 29 October 2010, 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 afte r the appellant has formally notified the Dispute
Settlement Body (the "DSB") 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.

 Australia notified the DSB on 31 August 2010 of its decision to appeal certain issues of law
covered in the Panel Report and le gal interpretations developed by the Panel in this case, with the
result that the 60-day period expires on Saturday, 30 October 2010. Due to the time required for
completion and translation of the Report, the Appella te Body will not be able to circulate its Report
by the following working day of the WTO Secretariat, namely, Monday 1 November 2010. We
estimate that the Appellate Body Report in this a ppeal will be circulated to WTO Members no later
than Monday, 29 November 2010.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 30 November 2010
Document codes: WT/DS367/16; WT/DS367/AB/R.
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION
OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from the Appellate Body

 The following communication, dated 29 November 2010, 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.

 It is my honour to provide to you the Report of the Appellate Body in , It will be circulated to
Members of the at 4.00 p.m. today, in accordance with paragraph 5 of
Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes . It is
a confidential document until its circulation. The three Members of the Appellate Body who served
on this appeal were Ms. Yuejiao Zhang, as Presiding Member, and Ms. Jennifer Hillman and
Mr. Shotaro Oshima, as Members.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Communication from Australia
Date: 13 January 2011
Document codes: WT/DS367/18
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Communication from Australia

 The following communication, dated 10 January 2011, from the delegation of Australia to the
Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of this delegation.

 At its 17 December 2010 meeting, the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted
recommendations and rulings in the dispute (WT/DS367). This communication advises the DSB of the intentions of Australia
with respect to implementation of the recommendati ons and rulings of the DSB, as is Australia's
responsibility under Article 21.3 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"). New Zealand has agreed that Australia would inform the DSB of its
intentions by written notification rather than at a special meeting of the DSB.

 Australia intends to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute in
a manner that meets its WTO obligations. The Au stralian Government Department of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Forestry, through Biosecurity Australia, will conduct a review of existing policy for
New Zealand apples for the three pests at issue in the dispute. The review will be conducted to the
standard of an import risk analysis, and will take into account the recommendations and rulings of the
DSB.

 Australia will need a reasonable period of time in which to conduct this review and
implement the rulings and recommendations of the DS B and stands ready to discuss this matter with
New Zealand, in accordance with Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.

 Australia requests that you circulate this communication to the Members of the DSB.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU
Date: 1 February 2011
Document codes: WT/DS367/19
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU

 The following communication, dated 31 January 2011, from the delegation of Australia and
the delegation of New Zealand to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.

 Australia and New Zealand wish to inform th e Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) that, pursuant
to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU), Australia and New Z ealand have agreed that the reasonable period of time for
Australia to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in (WT/DS367) shall expire on 17 August 2011. The agreed
period of time for implementation will allow Australi a to be in a position to issue import permits for
New Zealand apples from that date, based on any conditions that may arise out of the current review.

 Australia and New Zealand request that you circulate this communication to the Members of
the DSB.

For Australia

Trudy Witbreuk
Chargée d'affaires a.i.
For New Zealand

Brian Wilson
Chargé d'affaires a.i.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Request for Consultations by New Zealand
Date: 4 September 2007
Document codes: WT/DS367/1; G/L/825; G/SPS/GEN/796
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Request for Consultations by New Zealand

 The following communication, dated 31 Augus t 2007, from the delegation of New Zealand to
the delegation of Australia and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

 My authorities have instructed me to requ est consultations with Australia pursuant to
Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Article 4 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), and Article 11 of the Agreement
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), concerning the
measures imposed by Australia on the importation of apples from New Zealand.

 On 27 March 2007, the Australian Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine determined a
policy for the importation of apples from New Zeal and: "Importation of apples can be permitted
subject to the Quarantine Act 1908, and the application of phytosanitary measures as specified in the
Final import risk analysis report for apples from New Zealand, November 2006".
1

 New Zealand considers that the measures specifi ed in and required by Australia pursuant to
the Final import risk analysis report for apples from New Zealand are inconsistent with the
obligations of Australia under the SPS Agreement, and in particular, although not limited to, its
Articles 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6, 8 and Annex C.

 We look forward to receiving your reply to th is request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES FROM NEW ZEALAND
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 5 January 2011
Document codes: WT/DS367/17; WT/DS367/AB/R; WT/DS367/R
Complainant: New Zealand
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Chile, EU, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2, 2.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 8, Annex C  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)

AUSTRALIA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF APPLES
FROM NEW ZEALAND

Appellate Body Report and Panel Report

Action by the Dispute Settlement Body

 At its meeting on 17 December 2010, the Dis pute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate
Body report on Australia – Measures affecting the Im portation of Apples from New Zealand
() and the Panel report (), as modified by the Appellate Body report.
The Panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body report.

AUSTRALIE – MESURES AFFECTANT L'IMPORTATION DE POMMES
EN PROVENANCE DE NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE

Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial

de l'Organe d'appel sur l'affaire Australie – Mesures affectant l'importation de pommes en provenance
de Nouvelle-Zélande () et le rapport du Groupe spécial (), tel qu'il a
conjointement avec celui de l'Organe d'appel.

PROCEDENTES DE NUEVA ZELANDIA

Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias

 En su reunión de 17 de diciembre de 2010, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
manzanas procedentes de Nueva Zelandia () y el informe del Grupo Especial
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – CERTAIN MEASURES PROHIBITING THE IMPORTATION AND MARKETING OF SEAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA
Document: request for the establishment of a panel
Date: 3 December 2014
Document codes: WT/DS369/3
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Argentina, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Japan, Mexico, Norway, U.S.
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. I:1, III:4, XI:1, XXIII:1(b), V:2, V:3(a), V:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – CERTAIN MEASURES PROHIBITING
THE IMPORTATION AND MARKETING OF SEAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA
The following communication, dated 1 December 2014, from the delegation Canada to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.

With reference to the above-mentioned dispute for which a Panel was established on
25 March 2011, Canada has been informed that the measures at issue, which were taken by
Belgium and the Netherlands and concerned the importation, transportation, manufacturing,
marketing and sale of seal products, have been repealed.

As a result, the Government of Canada would like to terminate the panel composition process and
formally withdraw its complaint on this matter. Canada is making this request without prejudice to
its position that the measures at issue are WTO-inconsistent and to its views on the various factual
and legal issues outlined in its request for the establishment of a panel ().

Canada asks that you circulate this notification to the relevant Councils and Committees as well as
to the DSB.
THAILAND – CUSTOMS VALUATION OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the Philippines
Date: 8 February 2008
Document codes: WT/DS370/2; WT/DS370/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Thailand
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, II, III, VII, X, XI  GATT 1994Art. 1.1, 1.2, 5, 11, 12, 16, 22  Customs valuationArt. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

THAILAND – CUSTOMS VALUATION OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS
FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from the Philippines

 The following communication, dated 7 February 2008, from the delegation of the Philippines
to the delegation of Thailand, the delegation of the European Communities and to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 With reference to and pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding, I have the honour to request that the Philippines be joined in the consultations
requested by the European Communities, with resp ect to the way Thai customs authorities value
alcoholic beverages and other products from the European Communities.

 The Philippines has a substantial trade interest in the consultations requested by the EC. We
would be grateful of being informed of the date and venue of the consultations.
THAILAND – CUSTOMS VALUATION OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States
Date: 14 February 2008
Document codes: WT/DS370/3; WT/DS370/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Thailand
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, II, III, VII, X, XI  GATT 1994Art. 1.1, 1.2, 5, 11, 12, 16, 22  Customs valuationArt. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

THAILAND – CUSTOMS VALUATION OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS
FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from the United States

 The following communication, dated 11 Febr uary 2008, from the delegation of the United
States to the delegation of Thailand, the delegation of the European Communities and to the Chairman
of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

This concerns the request for consulta tions by the European Communities on Thailand –
Customs Valuation of Certain Produc ts from the European Communities , circulated on
30 January 2008 (). My authorities have instructed me to notify the consulting Members
and the Dispute Settlement Body of the desire of th e United States to be join ed in these consultations,
pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes.

The United States has a substantial tr ade interest in these consultations. The United States is
Thailand's fourth largest supplier of imported spir its. The United States is Thailand's fifth largest
supplier of imported wines. US spirits exports to Thailand were valued at $2 .6 million for the period
of January through November 2007. US wine expor ts to Thailand from the period of January through
November 2007 were valued at $1.8 million.
THAILAND – CUSTOMS AND FISCAL MEASURES ON CIGARETTES FROM THE PHILIPPINES
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from the European Communities
Date: 22 February 2008
Document codes: WT/DS371/2
Complainant: Philippines
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: Australia, China, EU, India, Taiwan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 13, 10  Customs valuationArt. X:3, II:1(b), II:3  GATT 1994Art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 1.1, 1.2  Customs valuationArt. VII:1, VII:2, VII:5  GATT 1994Art. 16  Customs valuationArt. X:1, III:2, III:4  GATT 1994

THAILAND – CUSTOMS AND FISCAL MEASURES ON CIGARETTES
FROM THE PHILIPPINES

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from the European Communities

 The following communication, dated 20 February 2008, from the delegation of the European
Communities to the delegation of Thailand, the dele gation of the Philippines and to the Chairman of
the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes (DSU), the European Communities hereby notifies the Government of
Thailand, the Government of the Philippines and the Dispute Settlement Body that, in the light of the
systemic interest of the European Communities of the ma tters in this dispute, it desires to be joined in
the consultations requested by the Philippines in a communication circulated to WTO Members on
12 February 2008 (, , ) entitled .

 The European Communities has a systemic trad e interest in the application of the Thai
measures at issue and of the correct application of the GATT and the Customs Valuation Agreement,
as evidenced by its own request for consultations ().