EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON MALLEABLE CAST IRON TUBE OR PIPE FITTINGS FROM BRAZIL
Document: Request for Consultations by Brazil
Date: 9 January 2001
Document codes: WT/DS219/1; G/L/432; G/ADP/D32/1
Complainant: Brazil
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Chile, Japan, Mexico, U.S.
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15  Anti-dumpingArt. I, VI  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON
MALLEABLE CAST IRON TUBE OR PIPE FITTINGS FROM BRAZIL
Request for Consultations by Brazil
The following communication, dated 21 December 2000, from the Permanent Mission of
Brazil to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
Upon instruction from my authorities, I hereby wish to convey the request of the Government
of Brazil for consultations with the European Communities pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), Article XXIII of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) and Article 17 of the Agreement on
Implementation of Article VI of GATT 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement), including Article 17.4
thereof.
(1) The measure at issue is the definitive anti-dumping duty which resulted from the
investigation, findings and determinations adopted by the European Union in Council
Regulation (EC) No. 1784/2000 of 11 August 200 0, published in the Official Journal of the
European Communities on 18 August 2000 (the definitive Regulation), concerning imports of
malleable cast iron tube or pipe fittings originating, inter alia, in Brazil.
(2) In view of the definitive Regulation and the other information available to them, my
authorities consider that the European Union has infringed WTO obligations as also
elaborated more specifically in (3) and (4) below.
(3) My authorities consider that the European Union's establishment of the facts was not proper
and that its evaluation of these facts was not unbiased and objective, both at the provisional
and definitive stages, particularly in relation to:
(i) the initiation of the investigation into this case (the investigation);
(ii) the conduct of the investigation, including the evaluation, findings and determinations
of dumping and injury;
(iii) the evaluation, findings and determinations of the causal link between dumping and
injury; and
(iv) the evaluation and findings in relation to the "Community interest".

(4) More specifically, my authorities consider th at infringements of the following provisions of
the Anti-Dumping Agreement, in addition to Article VI of GATT 1994, have been committed
by the EU:
(i) Article 1 (Principles);
(ii) Article 2 (Determination of Dumping), including paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6
thereof;
(iii) Article 3 (Determination of Injury), including paragraphs 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5
thereof;
(iv) Article 4 (Definition of the Domestic Industry), including paragraph 4.1 thereof;
(v) Article 5 (Initiation and Subsequent Inve stigation), including paragraphs 5.2, 5.3, 5.4,
5.5 (in the alternative), 5.7 and 5.8 thereof;
(vi) Article 6 (Evidence), including paragraphs 6.1, 6.2 and 6.12 thereof;
(vii) Article 7 (Provisional Measures);
(viii) Article 9 (Imposition and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duties), including
paragraph 9.1 thereof;
(ix) Article 11 (Duration and Review of Anti-Dumping Duties and Price Undertakings),
including paragraph 11.1 thereof;
(x) Article 12 (Public Notice and Explanation of Determinations), including
paragraph 12.2 thereof;
(xi) Article 15 (Developing Country Members).
In light of the DSU provisions governing this matter, including Article 4.3 thereof, as well as
Article 17 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, my authorities look forward to receiving in due course
the reply of the European Union to this request. Brazil is ready to consider with the European
Communities mutually convenient dates to hold consultations in Geneva.
The Government of Brazil reserves the right to raise additional factual or legal points related
to the aforementioned measure during the course of consultations.