dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
AUSTRALIA - ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF COATED WOODFREE PAPER SHEETS
Document: Original: English AUSTRALIA - ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF COATED WOODFREE PAPER SHEETS Notification of Mutually Agreed Solution
Date: 25 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS119/4; G/ADP/D8/2
Complainant: Switzerland
Respondent: Australia
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 3, 5  Anti-dumping

AUSTRALIA - ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF
COATED WOODFREE PAPER SHEETS
Notification of Mutually Agreed Solution
The following communication, dated 13 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Australia
and the Permanent Mission of Switzerland, is circulated pursuant to Article 3.6 of the DSU.
In a communication dated 20 February 1998 Switzerland sought consultations pursuant to
Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes and
paragraph 3 of Article 17 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of GATT 1994 regarding
provisional anti-dumping measures on imports of certain coated woodfree paper in sheets from
Switzerland. Consultations were held on 20 March 1998 ().
On 25 March 1998 the anti-dumping investigations into the subject imports from Switzerland
and a number of other countries were terminated. Accordingly the provisional measures were also
terminated and securities taken will be reimbursed. This was according to the normal procedures under
Australia’ s anti-dumping legislation as part of the final review before the Anti-Dumping Authority
makes recommendations to the responsible Minister.
Therefore the consultations have been concluded.
INDIA - MEASURES AFFECTING EXPORT OF CERTAIN COMMODITIES
Document: Original: English INDIA - MEASURES AFFECTING EXPORT OF CERTAIN COMMODITIES Request for Consultations from the European Communities
Date: 23 March 1998
Document codes: WT/DS120/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: India
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. XI  GATT 1994

INDIA - MEASURES AFFECTING EXPORT OF CERTAIN COMMODITIES
Request for Consultations from the European Communities
The following communication, from the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission
to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, dated 11 March 1998 and received on 16 March 1998,
transmits a request for consultations with India under Article XXIII of GATT 1994, is circulated to
the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with India pursuant to Article XXIII:1
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and Article 4 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes with regard to the provision of the EXIM
Policy (1997-2002), which sets up a negative list for the export of several commodities. Under these
provisions (Part II, point 16.2, item no. 10) raw hides and skins, all types excluding lamb fur skin,
are listed as products the export of which requires an export licence granted by the Director General
of Foreign Trade. However, licences for these products are systematically refused. The absence of
significantexports for the above commodities isalso supported by trade statisticsdrawn by international
agencies. There is no evidence that such restrictions are temporary nor that they have the objective
of relieving a critical shortage of products essential to the exports of India.
The European Communities have therefore come to the conclusion that an export embargo
for raw hides and skins is in place. The European Communities consider that the practice described
above violates the obligations of India under GATT 1994: in particular, the European Communities
are of the view that the above practice contravenes, though not necessarily exclusively, the provision
of Article XI of GATT 1994.
The European Communities are very concerned bythis practice as itappears to nullify orimpair
the benefits accruing to the European Communities under GATT 1994, particularly because such practice
limits the access of EC industry to competitive sourcing of raw and semi-finished materials.
I look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually acceptable date
for consultations.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Request for Consultations from the European Communities
Date: 8 April 1998
Document codes: WT/DS121/1; G/L/232; G/SG/D3/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request for Consultations from the European Communities
The following communication, dated 3 April 1998, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission to the Permanent Mission of Argentina 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 Argentina
underArticleXXII:1 of the General Agreement onTariffs and Trade 1994(“ GATT1994") and pursuant
to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (“ DSU” )
and Article14of the AgreementonSafeguards withregard tothe provisionaland the definitivesafeguard
measures imposed by Argentina on imports of footwear.
UnderResolution 226/97,publishedinthe OfficialJournalof theArgentineRepublic No.28592
on 24 February 1997, Argentina imposed a provisional safeguard measure in the form of minimum
specific duties on imports of footwear effective as of 25 February 1997. Under Resolution 987/97,
publishedin the Official Journal of the Argentine Republic No. 28729on12 September 1997,Argentina
imposed a definitive safeguard measure in the form of minimum specific duties on imports of footwear
effective as of 13 September 1997. The European Communities consider that the above measures are
in breach of Argentina’ s obligationsunder the provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards, inparticular,
but not necessarily exclusively, of Articles 2, 4, 5, 6 and 12 of the said Agreement and in violation
of Article XIX of GATT 1994.
I look forward to receiving the reaction of your authorities to this request so that we can arrange
a mutually convenient date and place to begin consultations, which the European Communities suggest
to be held in Geneva during the week beginning 20 April 1998.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Original: English ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States
Date: 20 April 1998
Document codes: WT/DS121/2
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 16 April 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of Argentina, the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission
and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
I am writing to inform you that, pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, the United States wishes to be joined
in consultations under Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 requested
by the European Communities in The European Communities’ request, which was
circulated to WTO Members on 8 April 1998, referred to provisional and definitive safeguard measures
imposed by Argentina on imported footwear under Resolutions 226/97, dated 24 February 1997, and
987/97, dated 12 September 1997.
The United States, as a major exporter of footwear, has a substantial trade interest in these
consultations.
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities
Date: 11 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS121/3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities
The following communication, dated 10 June 1998, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to
Article 6.2 of the DSU.
I have the honour to request the establishment of a Panel pursuant to Article XXIII of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994), Articles 4 and 6 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes and Article 14 of the Agreement on
Safeguards, with regard to the provisional and the definitive safeguard measures imposed by
Argentina on imports of footwear.
Under Resolution 226/97, published in the Official Journal of the Argentina Republic
No. 28592 on 24 February 1997, Argentina imposed a provisional safeguard measure in the form of
minimum specific duties on imports of footwear effective as of 25 February 1997. Under Resolution
987/97, published in the Official Journal of the Argentine Republic No. 28729 on 12 September 1997,
Argentina imposed a definitive safeguard measure in the form of minimum specific duties on imports
of footwear effective as of 13 September 1997.
On 3 April 1998, the European Communities (EC) requested consultations with Argentina
with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution of the matter. The request was circulated in
document dated 8 April 1998. Such consultations, which were held on 24 April 1998 in
Geneva, have allowed a better understanding of the respective positions but have not led to a
satisfactory resolution of the matter.
Therefore, the EC request that the panel consider and find that these measures are in breach of
Argentina's obligations under the provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards, in particular, but not
necessarily exclusively, of Article 2 (especially th e requirement of determining in an investigation
that certain conditions are present and the non-discrimination obligation), Article 4 (in particular that
all relevant factors must be investigated and to demonstrate the existence of a causal link), Article 5
(especially the condition that measures must only be applied to prevent or remedy serious injury),
Article 6 (in particular the requirement of evidence of "critical circumstances") and Article 12
(especially the notification obligations) of the said Agreement and in violation of Article XIX of
GATT 1994 (in particular the lack of "unforeseen developments").
The EC request that the panel be established with the standard terms of reference.
The EC ask that this request be placed on the agenda for the meeting of the Dispute
Settlement Body to be held on 22 June 1998.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the European Communities Note by the Secretariat
Date: 18 September 1998
Document codes: WT/DS121/4; WT/DS121/3; WT/DS121/3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON
IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the European Communities
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 23 July 1998 the Dispute Settl ement Body (DSB) established a panel pursuant
to a request made by the European Communities ().
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute ag reed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference. The terms of reference are the following:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant prov isions of the covered agreements cited by the
European Communities in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the
European Communities 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 15 September1998, the Panel was constituted as follows:
Chairman: Mr. John McNab
Members: Ms. Claudia Orozco
Ms. Laurence Wiedmer
4. Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay and the United States have reserved their rights as third
parties to the dispute.
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 30 March 1999
Document codes: WT/DS121/5
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 26 March 1999, addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article12.9 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 that the final report is issued to the parties shall, as a general rule, not exceed six
months.
Article 12.9 of the DSU states that when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report within
six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settlement 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 “" was established by
the DSB on 23 July 1998 to examine a complaint from the European Communities.
The Panel was composed on 15 September 1998. However, the Panel is not able to complete
its work in six months due in part to extensions to the timetable jointly requested by the Parties, as
well as the number of issues that must be considered and the volume of the submissions to the Panel.
The Panel expects to circulate the final report to the parties by the end of May 1999.
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Notification of an Appeal Corrigendum In the second heading, first line, the word "India" should read "Argentina".
Date: 22 September 1999
Document codes: WT/DS121/6/Corr.11
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON
IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Notification of an Appeal
Corrigendum
In the second heading, first line, the word "India" should read "Argentina".
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 10 November 1999
Document codes: WT/DS121/7
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON
IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 10 November 1999, 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.
Argentina 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
15 September 1999 with the result that the 60-day period will expire on Monday, 15 November 1999.
Due to the time required for completion and translation of the Report, the Appellate Body will not be
able to circulate its Report by 15 November 1999. We estimate that the Appellate Body Report in this
appeal will be circulated to WTO Members no later than Tuesday, 14 December 1999.
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 14 December 1999
Document codes: WT/DS121/8; WT/DS121/AB/R.
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON
IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 14 December 1999, from Mr. Said El-Naggar, 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 , It will be circulated later today to Members of
the , in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes . The three Members of the
Appellate Body who served on this appeal were Mr. James Bacchus, as Presiding Member;
Mr. Christopher Beeby and Mr. Mitsuo Matsushita, as Members.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body On 12 January 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on "Argentina - Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear " (WT/DS121/AB/R) and the panel report (WT/DS121/R), as modified by the Appellate Body Report.  The panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body report. ARGENTINE - MESURES DE SAUVEGARDE À L'IMPORTATION DE CHAUSSURES Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends À sa réunion du 12 janvier 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel intitulé "Argentine - Mesures de sauvegarde à l'importation de chaussures" (WT/DS121/AB/R) et le rapport du Groupe spécial (WT/DS121/R) modifié par le rapport de l'Organe d'appel.  Le rapport du Groupe spécial est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel. ARGENTINA - MEDIDAS DE SALVAGUARDIA IMPUESTAS
Date: 2 March 2000
Document codes: WT/DS121/9; WT/DS121/AB/R; WT/DS121/R
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: Brazil, Indonesia, Paraguay, Uruguay, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
On 12 January 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on
" " () and the panel report
(), as modified by the Appellate Body Report. The panel report should be read in
conjunction with the Appellate Body report.
ARGENTINE - MESURES DE SAUVEGARDE À
L'IMPORTATION DE CHAUSSURES
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial
À sa réunion du 12 janvier 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de
l'Organe d'appel intitulé "Argentine - Mesures de sauvegarde à l'importation de chaussures"
d'appel. Le rapport du Groupe spécial est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel.
ARGENTINA - MEDIDAS DE SALVAGUARDIA IMPUESTAS
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
de Apelación titulado " Argentina - Medidas de salvaguardia impuestas a las importaciones de
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Poland Note by the Secretariat
Date: 23 December 1999
Document codes: WT/DS122/3; WT/DS122/2.; WT/DS122/2; WT/DS122/2
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON
OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Poland
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a Panel
in accordance with the request made by Poland in document
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute al so agreed that the Panel should have standard
terms of reference. The terms of reference are, therefore, the following:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by Poland in document , the matter referred to the DSB by Poland in
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 20 December 1999, the parties to the dispute agreed on the following composition of the
Panel:
Chairman: Professor John H. Jackson
Members: Mr. Roberto de Azevedo
Mr. Gilles Gauthier
4. The European Communities, Japan and the United States reserved their rights to participate in
the panel proceedings as third parties.
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 20 December 2000
Document codes: WT/DS122/5
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES,
SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY
STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 20 December 2000, 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.
Thailand 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
23 October 2000, with the result that the 60-day period will expire on Friday, 22 December 2000.
The Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its Report by 22 December 2000. Due to the
exceptional workload of the Appellate Body during the current period, and in light of the agreement
of the participants, Thailand and Poland, the Appellate Body Report in this appeal will be circulated
to WTO Members no later than Monday, 12 March 2001.
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 9 March 2001
Document codes: WT/DS122/6
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES,
SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY
STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 9 March 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 Thailand – Anti-
Dumping Duties on Angles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel and H-Beams from
Poland, W T / D S 1 2 2 / A B / R . I t w i l l b e c i r c u l a t e d to Members of the on
Monday, 12 March 2001, 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:
Mr. A.V. Ganesan, as Presiding Member; Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró and Mr. Yasuhei Taniguchi, as
Members.
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU
Date: 29 May 2001
Document codes: WT/DS122/8
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES,
SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY
STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Agreement under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU
The following communication, dated 25 May 2001, from the Permanent Missions of Poland
and Thailand to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with
Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.
The Representatives of the Republic of Poland and the Kingdom of Thailand hereby agree,
pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
of Disputes (DSU), that the reasonable period of time for Thailand to implement the recommendations
and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in the dispute "Thailand - Anti-Dumping Duties on
Angles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non- Alloy Steel and H-Beams from Poland (WT/DS122)"
shall be six months and 15 days from the date of adoption of the Panel and Appellate Body Reports
and shall expire on 20 October 2001.
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Communication from Thailand
Date: 23 January 2002
Document codes: WT/DS122/11
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES,
SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY
STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Communication from Thailand
The following communication, dated 21 January 2002, from the Permanent Mission of
Thailand to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that
delegation.
Upon consultation, I am writing this letter to inform you that the Republic of Poland and the
Kingdom of Thailand have reached agreement that the item on Surveillance of Implementation of
Recommendations and Rules Adopted by the DSB in "Thailand – Anti-Dumping Duties on Angles,
Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy Stee l and H-Beams from Poland" (WT/DS122) should no
longer remain on the agenda of the Dispute Settle ment Body. However, this may not in any way
prejudice the rights of either Party to the dispute to be exercised in accordance with the DSU.
THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES, SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 11 April 2001
Document codes: WT/DS122/7; WT/DS122/AB; WT/DS122/R
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Thailand
Third parties: EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 5, 6  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

THAILAND – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON ANGLES,
SHAPES AND SECTIONS OF IRON OR NON-ALLOY
STEEL AND H-BEAMS FROM POLAND
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 5 April 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body
report on "Thailand – Anti-Dumping Duties on An gles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy
Steel and H-Beams from Poland" ( /R) and the panel report (), as
modified by the Appellate Body report. The panel report should be read in conjunction with the
Appellate Body report.
OU EN ACIERS NON ALLIÉS ET LES POUTRES EN H
EN PROVENANCE DE POLOGNE
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial
À sa réunion du 5 avril 2001, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de
l'Organe d'appel intitulé "Thaïlande – Droits antidumping sur les profilés en fer ou en aciers non alliés
rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel.
PERFILES DE HIERRO Y ACERO SIN ALEAR Y
VIGAS DOBLE T PROCEDENTES DE POLONIA
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión del 5 de abril de 2001 el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el informe
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Request for Consultations by Indonesia
Date: 27 April 1998
Document codes: WT/DS123/1; G/L/236; G/SG/D4/1
Complainant: Indonesia
Respondent: Argentina
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7  Safeguards

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request for Consultations by Indonesia
The following communication, dated 22 April 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Indonesia
to the Permanent Mission of Argentina and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
Upon instruction from my authorities, I wish to convey the request of the Government of
Indonesia for consultations with the Government of Argentina pursuant to Article XXII:1 of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU") and Article 14 of the Agreement on
Safeguards regarding the provisional and the definitive safeguard measures imposed by Argentina on
imports of footwear.
The Government of Argentina introduced a provisional safeguard measure in the form of
minimum specific duties on imports of footwear under Resolution 226/97, published in the Official
Journal of the Argentine Republic No. 28592 on 24 February 1997 effective as of 25 February 1997.
Under Resolution 987/97, published in Official Journal of the Argentine Republic No. 28729 on
12 September 1997 effective as of 13 September 1997, Argentine imposed a definitive safeguard measure
in the form of minimum specific duties on imports of footwear. The Government of Indonesia considers
thatthese measures are inconsistent withthe obligationsof Argentinaunderthe GATT1994Article XIX
and the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, in particular of Articles 2, 4, 5, 6 and 12. These measures
cause serious injury to the trade interests of Indonesia, which is a significant exporter of footwear.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request for consultations and arranging a mutually
convenient date and place for consultations.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Original: English ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States
Date: 13 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS123/2; WT/DS123/1.
Complainant: Indonesia
Respondent: Argentina
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7  Safeguards

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 7 May 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Mission of Argentina and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
I am writing to inform you that, pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, the United States wishes to be joined
in consultations under Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 requested
by Indonesia in Indonesia's request, which was circulated to WTO Members on
27 April 1998, referred to provisional and definitive safeguard measures imposed by Argentina on
imported footwear under Resolutions 226/97, dated 24 February 1998, and 987/97, dated
12 September 1997.
The United States, as a major exporter of footwear, has a substantial trade interest in these
consultations.
ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Communication from Indonesia
Date: 11 May 1999
Document codes: WT/DS123/4; WT/DS123/3
Complainant: Indonesia
Respondent: Argentina
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 12  SafeguardsArt. XIX  GATT 1994Art. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7  Safeguards

ARGENTINA - SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Communication from Indonesia
The following communication, dated 10 May 1999, from the Permanent Mission of Indonesia
to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members at the request of that
delegation.
I have the honour to inform you that the Government of the Republic of Indonesia hereby
withdraws from the agenda for the meeting of the Di spute Settlement Body scheduled to be held on
26 May 1999 the request for the establishment of a panel in (, dated 16 April 1999).
My authorities have taken this decision based upon the interventions of the delegations of
Argentina and the European Communities during the discussion of this matter at the meeting of the
Dispute Settlement Body held on 28 April 1999 regarding developments in a related panel
proceeding. Furthermore, my authorities have taken this decision with the reservation of all rights
under the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes with respect
to the request for establishment of a panel, and the understanding that, should Indonesia choose to
include the request as an item on the agenda of a future meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body, the
Dispute Settlement Body shall treat the agenda item as its second consideration of the request and
establish a panel at that meeting pursuant to Article 6.1 of the Understanding.
ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Document: Request for Consultations by Indonesia Addendum
Date: 11 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS123/1/Add.1; G/L/236/Add.1; G/SG/D4/1/Add.1
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: EU, India, Japan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(a), 10, 17.1(b), 19.4, 32.1  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI:3  GATT 1994Art. 1.2, 2, 1.1(b), 14, 17.5, 3.1(a), 20.6, 19.3, 21.1, 21.2, 32.5  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

ARGENTINA – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF FOOTWEAR
Request for Consultations by Indonesia
Addendum
The following communication, dated 18 December 1998, from the Permanent Mission of
Indonesia to the Permanent Mission of Argentina and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have recently received information indicating that the Government of
Argentina has modified the manner in which it is implementing Resolution 987/97 of the Ministry of
Economy and Public Works and Services, published in Official Journal of the Argentine Republic
No. 28729 on 12 September 1997, effective as of 13 September 1997, one of the measures included
within the scope of the above mentioned consultations. In particular, I draw your attention to
Resolution 1506/98 of the Ministry of Economy and Public Works and Services, dated 16 November
1998, and Decision 837/98 of the Secretariat for Industry, Trade and Mining, dated 4 December 1998.
Accordingly, upon instruction from my authorities, I wish to convey the request of the
Government of Indonesia to hold another round of consultations with the Government of Argentina so
that we might seek clarification of the implementation of Argentina's safeguard measures on the
importation of footwear.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request for consultations and arranging a
mutually convenient date and place for consultations.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR MOTION PICTURES ANDTELEVISION PROGRAMS
Document: Original: English EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR MOTION PICTURES ANDTELEVISION PROGRAMS Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 7 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS124/1; IP/D/13
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 41, 61  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
FOR MOTION PICTURES ANDTELEVISION PROGRAMS
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 30 April 1998, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission 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 European Communities
pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(DSU) and Article 64 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
(to the extent it incorporates by reference Article XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
1994) regarding the enforcement of intellectual property rights in Greece.
The TRIPS Agreement applied to developed Members of the WTO, such as the European
Communities, as of 1 January 1996. Such Members are obligated to comply with the provisions of
Part III of the TRIPS Agreement regarding the enforcement of intellectual property rights, among other
obligations.
A significant number of television stations in Greece regularly broadcast copyrighted motion
pictures and television programs without the authorization of copyright owners. Effective remedies
against copyright infringement do not appear to be provided or enforced in Greece with respect to these
unauthorized broadcasts. Copyrights owned by US nationals have been infringed in this manner
repeatedly, and continuetobe infringed,despiteefforts byUS rightholderstopreventsuchinfringement
and to pursue their rights in Greece. This situation appears to be inconsistent with the obligations of
Members under Articles 41 and 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to the present request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for consultations.
GREECE - ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR MOTION PICTURES AND TELEVISION PROGRAMS
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 7 May 1998
Document codes: WT/DS125/1; IP/D/14
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Greece
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 41, 61  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

GREECE - ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
FOR MOTION PICTURES AND TELEVISION PROGRAMS
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 4 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 Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(DSU) and Article 64 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
(to the extent it incorporates by reference Article XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
1994) regarding the enforcement of intellectual property rights in Greece.
The TRIPS Agreement applied to developed country Members of the WTO, such as Greece,
as of 1 January 1996. Such Members are obligated to comply with the provisions of Part III of the
TRIPS Agreement regarding the enforcement of intellectual property rights, among other obligations.
A significant number of television stations in Greece regularly broadcast copyrighted motion
pictures and television programs without the authorization of copyright owners. Effective remedies
against copyright infringement do not appear to be provided or enforced in Greece with respect to these
unauthorized broadcasts. Copyrights owned by US nationals have been infringed in this manner
repeatedly, and continuetobe infringed,despiteefforts byUS rightholderstopreventsuchinfringement
and to pursue their rights in Greece. This situation appears to be inconsistent with the obligations of
Members under Articles 41 and 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
We look forward to receiving your reply to the present request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for consultations.
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Communication from Australia
Date: 19 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS126/3
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
Communication from Australia
The following communication dated 4 June 1998 from the Permanent Mission of Australia to
the Permanent Mission of the United States is circulated at the request of Australia.
Your letter of 4 May 1998 asked for consultations regarding an Australian Government
measure on automotive leather. It asked for consultations under Article 1 and 4 of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) and Article 4 of the Agreement
on Subsides and Countervailing Measures (Subsidies Agreement).
This request is in respect of the same claim regarding the same measure and the same
provision of the Subsidies Agreement as the panel established by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB)
on 22 January 1998.
Australia as always is willing to talk to the United States Government, and the Office of the
USTR in particular, about your concerns regardin g trade between our two countries, bearing in mind
Article 3.10 of the DSU. However, your letter does raise a number of issues regarding its status in
the WTO.
We recognise that under the DSU, and the Subsidies Agreement in particular, a Member has
the right to have a panel established to examine an issue of consistency with rights and obligations
under the WTO Agreement, subject to the appropriate procedural requirements being met. However,
the United States' letter seeks consultations on exactly the same measure, under exactly the same
provision of the WTO Agreement. The United States has not even made any claim that the measure
has been modified, since the time of the first procedural step towards the establishment of the existing
panel ( dated 17 November 1997).
In our view the United States has the right to a panel under the WTO Agreement, once it has
fulfilled the procedural requirements, but that right is limited to one panel at any one time for the
same claims in respect of the same measure.
The United States would not be entitled to have a new panel established on this matter until it
has terminated the existing panel established on 22 January 1998. Indeed the United States clearly
cannot start to fulfil the procedural requirements for the establishment of a new panel until the
existing one is terminated. Accordingly, documentation such as the letter of 4 May 1998 cannot be
considered to contribute to the fulfilment of the procedural requirements under the DSU and Article 4
of the Subsidies Agreement for acquiring the right to the establishment of a panel on this matter.
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States Communication from the DSB Chairman
Date: 4 November 1998
Document codes: WT/DS126/4; WT/DS126/2; WT/DS126/2
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
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States
Communication from the DSB Chairman
1. At its meeting on 22 June 1998, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a panel
pursuant to a request made by the United States ().
2. At that DSB meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms
of reference. The terms of reference of the Panel are the following:
"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. On 27 October 1998, the United States 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 panellists within 20 days after the date of the
establishment of a panel, at the request of eith er party, the Director-General, in consultation
with the Chairman of the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council or Committee, shall
determine the composition of the panel by appointing the panellists whom the Director-General
considers 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 the dispute,
after consulting with the parties to the disput e. The Chairman of the DSB shall inform the
Members of the composition of the panel thus fo rmed no later than 10 days after the date the
Chairman receives such a request."1
4. On 2 November 1998, the Director-General accordingly composed the panel as follows:
Chairperson: H. E. Carmen Luz Guarda
Members: Mr. Jean-François Bellis
Mr. Wieslaw Karsz
AUSTRALIA – SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS OF AUTOMOTIVE LEATHER
Document: Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings Time Period for Implementation
Date: 8 July 1999
Document codes: WT/DS126/6
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
Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings
Time Period for Implementation
The following communication, dated 6 July 1999, from the Permanent Mission of Australia to
the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.
In view of Article 4.7 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and
Article 1.2 of the DSU, Australia considers that the first sentence of Article 21.3 of the DSU does not
apply to the panel report "Australia - Subsidies Pr ovided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive
Leather". Nonetheless Australia did ask for a DSB meeting on 1 July 1999, to be held in conjunction
with an informal DSB meeting, to reiterate that it intends to implement the panel report, which it had
already indicated at the DSB meeting on 16 June 1999. Following the cancellation of the DSB
informal meeting on 1 July 1999, and pursuant to a suggestion by the chair of the DSB, Australia
withdrew its request for the formal meeting.
The United States was informed at a bilateral meeting in Canberra on 25 June 1999 that
Australia intends to implement the DSB recommendations. Nonetheless, following representations by
the United States, Australia informs the DSB that it intends to implement the DSB recommendations
within the time frame provided for in the panel report adopted by the DSB on 16 June 1999.