dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING ACT OF 1916
Document: Request by the European Communities and Japan for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
Date: 21 November 2000
Document codes: WT/DS136/9; WT/DS162/12
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: EU, India
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. III:4, VI, XI  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 11, 18.1, 18.4  Anti-dumpingArt. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING ACT OF 1916
Request by the European Communities and Japan
for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
The following communication, dated 17 November 2000, from the Permanent Delegation of
the European Commission and the Permanent Mission of Japan to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of those delegations.
On 26 September the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the recommendations and rulings of
the Appellate Body and Panel reports in . In view of the
impossibility to reach an agreement with the United States on the duration of the period required for
the implementation of those recommendations and rulings, Japan and the European Communities
hereby request that such period be determined by binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the
Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU).
Pursuant to footnote 12 of the DSU, the representatives of Japan and the European
Communities will immediately open discussions with the United States with a view to achieving
agreement on an arbitrator within the next ten days.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING IMPORTS OF WOOD OF CONIFERS FROM CANADA
Document: Request for Consultations by Canada
Date: 24 June 1998
Document codes: WT/DS137/1; G/L/246; G/SPS/GEN/84; G/TBT/D/17
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, III, XI  GATT 1994Art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. 2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING IMPORTS
OF WOOD OF CONIFERS FROM CANADA
Request for Consultations by Canada
The following communication, dated 17 June 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Canada
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.
The Government of Canada requests consultations with the European Communities pursuant
to Article XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Article 11 of the Agreement on
the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and Article 14 of the Agreement on
Technical Barriers to Trade, regarding certain measures concerning the importation into the European
Communities of wood of conifers originating in Canada. These measures include but are not limited
to Council Directive 77/93/EEC, of 21 December 1976, as amended by Commission Directive
92/103/EEC, of 1 December 1992, and any further m odifications thereto, as well as any relevant
measures adopted by the EC Member States affecting exports of wood of conifers originating in
Canada.
These measures adversely affect the importation into the European Communities of wood of
conifers originating in Canada. The Government of Canada is of the view that these measures are
inconsistent with the obligations of the European Communities under the Agreement on the
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994. The provisions of these agreements with
which these measures are inconsistent include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Article 2, 3,
4, 5 and 6;
(ii) Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, Article 2; and
(iii) General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Articles I, III and XI.
The Government of Canada is of the view that these measures nullify or impair the benefits
accruing to Canada directly or indirectly under the cited Agreements, regardless of whether violations
of these Agreements occurred.
In accordance with Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes, the Government of Ca nada requests consultations with the European
Communities to discuss this matter with the intention of reaching a satisfactory result. We look
forward to your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient date for consultations.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication by Canada
Date: 21 July 1998
Document codes: WT/DS138/2
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS
ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Request to Join Consultations
Communication by Canada
The following communication, dated 16 July 1998, from the Permanent Mission of Canada to
the Permanent Mission of the United States and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, the Government of Canada hereby notifies you that due to its
substantial trade interest, it desires to be joined in the consultations under Article XXII of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 requested by the Permanent Delegation of the EC in Geneva by
letter dated 12 June 1998 (; 6 July 1998), with respect to the imposition of
countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel (leaded bars) originating in
the United Kingdom in the context of three successive administrative reviews.
Canada has a substantial trade interest in these consultations. Canadian exports to the US
exceed C$200 billion per annum and account for over 80% of all of Canada's exports. The treatment
of the effect of privatization on previously bestowed subsidies is of relevance to exporters of goods
from companies that have been or may be privatized. Indeed, in a recent CVD investigation the US
did not find past subsidies to have been extinguished upon privatization. Finally, Canada is a major
exporter of steel to the US market and many antidumping/countervailing duty investigations of
Canadian goods involve steel products.
UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities
Date: 14 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS138/3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS
ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities
The following communication, dated 14 January 1999, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission to the Chairman of the Disput e Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 6.2 of the DSU.
I have the honour to request the establishment of a panel pursuant to Articles 4 and 6 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Article XXIII of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and Article 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies
and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) with respect to the imposition of countervailing duties on
certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel (leaded bars) originating in the United Kingdom and
three successive administrative reviews.
On 12 June 1998 the European Communities (EC) requested consultations with the United
States with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution of the matter. The request was
circulated in document - dated 6 July 1998. These consultations, which
were held on 29 July 1998 in Geneva, have allowed a better understanding of the respective positions
but have not led to a satisfactory resolution of the matter.
The factual background to the complaint is set out in the request for consultations referred to
above. The United States refuses to take account of the privatisation or change of ownership of the
body receiving a subsidy, even if at a full market price, and to consider whether the subsidy still
provides a benefit when assessing or reassessing the countervailable subsidy. Instead the United
States considers that the subsidy "travels with" the assets when they are transferred. The United
States allocates the amount of the subsidy to the new owners of the assets according to a methodology
which has no rational basis and has never been explained or justified in the determinations.
The EC request that a dispute settlement panel be established to consider and find that these
measures are in breach of the United States' obligations under the provisions of the ASCM, in
particular, but not necessarily exclusively, of Article 1.1(b), Article 10, Article 14 and Article 19.4 of
the said Agreement.
The EC request that the panel be established with the standard terms of reference.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the European Communities
Date: 25 March 1999
Document codes: WT/DS138/4; WT/DS138/3; WT/DS138/3/Corr.; WT/DS138/3/Corr.
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the European Communities
1. At its meeting on 17 February 1999 the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a panel
pursuant to a request made by the European Communities ( and 1).
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference. The terms of reference are the following:
"To examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by
the European Communities in document WT /DS138/3 and 1, 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 16 March 1999, the Panel was constituted as follows:
Chairman: Mr. Ole Lundby
Members: Mr. Paul O'Connor
Mr. Arie Reich
4. Brazil and Mexico have reserved their rights as third parties to the dispute.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 27 March 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/6
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 23 March 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 (the "DSU"), which stipulates that, as a general rule, the
Appellate Body will circulate its report no later than 60 days after the appellant has 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 it s 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.
The United States 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
27 January 2000, with the result that the 60-day period will expire on Monday, 27 March 2000. Due,
in part, to the untimely and tragic death of Mr. Christopher Beeby, a Member of the Division hearing
this appeal, the Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its Report by 27 March 2000.
Article 17.5 of the DSU provides that appellate review proceedings shall not exceed 90 days.
However, in view of the extraordinary circumstances in this appeal, the participants, the United States
and the European Communities, have agreed to extend the 90-day period by two weeks. In light of
these considerations, we estimate that the Appellate Body Report in this appeal will be circulated to
WTO Members no later than Wednesday, 10 May 2000.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 4 April 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/7
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 30 March 2000, from the Chairman of the Appellate
Body addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with
Rule 15 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review.
As you are aware, the terms of office of Messrs. Said El-Naggar and Mitsuo Matsushita
expire on 31 March 2000. They are both Members of the Division currently hearing the appeal in
. The Appellate Review proceedings in this appeal
will not be completed by the date of expiry of their terms on 31 March, but will be completed by
10 May 2000. As I informed you in my letter of 23 March 2000, due to the extraordinary
circumstances of Mr. Beeby's untimely and tragic demise, the parties in this appeal have agreed to
extend the deadline for completion of the Appellate Body Report to no later than 10 May 2000.
Rule 15 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review provides: "A person who ceases to
be a Member of the Appellate Body may, with the authorization of the Appellate Body and upon
notification to the DSB, complete the disposition of any appeal to which that person was assigned
while a Member …". The Appellate Body has authorized Messrs. El-Naggar and Matsushita to
complete the disposition of this appeal. For that purpose only, they shall be deemed to continue to be
Members of the Appellate Body until the Appellate Body Report in this appeal is circulated to WTO
Members no later than 10 May 2000.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 10 May 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/8
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 10 May 2000, from Mr. Florentino Feliciano, 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. Mitsuo Matsushita, as Presiding Member;
Mr. Said El-Naggar and Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró, as Members.
UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities Corrigendum Document WT/DS138/3 is amended by adding after paragraph 3 the following paragraph: In particular, no attempt has ever been made in the final determinations to justify or rationalise what benefits continue to result from subsidies following privatisation or sale of assets at fair market prices.  The US methodology relied entirely on the presumption (based mostly on pre- WTO legislation and practice) that benefits from prior subsidies pass through without the need to show that a benefit continues to be conferred as mandated by the ASCM.  The European Communities consider that the imposition of countervailing duties in the above circumstances constitutes a breach of the ASCM.
Date: 25 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS138/3/Corr.; WT/DS138/3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

1

UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS
ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the European Communities
Corrigendum
Document is amended by adding after paragraph 3 the following paragraph:
In particular, no attempt has ever been made in the final determinations to justify or
rationalise what benefits continue to result from subsidies following privatisation or sale of assets at
fair market prices. The US methodology relied entirely on the presumption (based mostly on pre-
WTO legislation and practice) that benefits from prior subsidies pass through without the need to
show that a benefit continues to be conferred as mandated by the ASCM. The European Communities
consider that the imposition of countervailing duties in the above circumstances constitutes a breach
of the ASCM.
UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERV AILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM REPORT OF THE PANEL
Document: Corrigendum The Note by the Secretariat at the foot of page 1 should read: "This Panel Report shall be adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) within 60 days …" and not 30 days as shown.
Date: 25 February 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/R/Corr.2
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – IMPOSITION OF COUNTERV AILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
REPORT OF THE PANEL
Corrigendum
The Note by the Secretariat at the foot of page 1 should read:
"This Panel Report shall be adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) within
60 days …"
and not 30 days as shown.
UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body On 7 June 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on "United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom " (WT/DS138/AB/R) and the panel report (WT/DS138/R), as modified by the Appellate Body report.  The panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body report. ÉTATS-UNIS – IMPOSITION DE DROITS COMPENSATEURS SUR CERTAINS PRODUITS EN ACIER AU CARBONE, PLOMB ET BISMUTH LAMINÉS À CHAUD ORIGINAIRES DU ROYAUME-UNI Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Le 7 juin 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel intitué "États-Unis – Imposition de droits compensateurs sur certains produits en acier au carbone,
Date: 21 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/9; WT/DS138/AB/R; WT/DS138/R
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
On 7 June 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.
ÉTATS-UNIS – IMPOSITION DE DROITS COMPENSATEURS
SUR CERTAINS PRODUITS EN ACIER AU CARBONE,
PLOMB ET BISMUTH LAMINÉS À CHAUD
ORIGINAIRES DU ROYAUME-UNI
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial
Le 7 juin 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel
intitué "États-Unis – Imposition de droits compensateurs sur certains produits en acier au carbone,
spécial est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel.
ESTADOS UNIDOS - ESTABLECIMIENTO DE DERECHOS COMPENSATORIOS
SOBRE DETERMINADOS PRODUCTOS DE ACERO AL CARBONO ALEADO
CON PLOMO YBISMUTO Y LAMINADO EN CALIENTE
ORIGINARIOS DEL REINO UNIDO
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
Apelación titulado " Estados Unidos - Establecimiento de derechos compensatorios sobre
determinados productos de acero al carbono aleado con plomo y bismuto y laminado en caliente
UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body Corrigendum In the fourth line "as modified by the Appellate Body report." should read "as upheld by the Appellate Body report." ÉTATS-UNIS - IMPOSITION DE DROITS COMPENSATEURS SUR CERTAINS PRODUITS EN ACIER AU CARBONE, PLOMB ET BISMUTH LAMINÉS À CHAUD ORIGINAIRES DU ROYAUME-UNI Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Corrigendum À la quatrième ligne, le membre de phrase "modifié par le rapport de l'Organe d'appel" doit se lire "confirmé par le rapport de l'Organe d'appel". ESTADOS UNIDOS - ESTABLECIMIENTO DE DERECHOS COMPENSATORIOS
Date: 27 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS138/9/Corr.1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Mexico
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1.1(b), 10, 14, 19.4  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES - IMPOSITION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES ON
CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED LEAD AND BISMUTH CARBON STEEL
PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Corrigendum
In the fourth line "as modified by the Appellate Body report." should read "as upheld by the
Appellate Body report."
ÉTATS-UNIS - IMPOSITION DE DROITS COMPENSATEURS
SUR CERTAINS PRODUITS EN ACIER AU CARBONE,
PLOMB ET BISMUTH LAMINÉS À CHAUD
ORIGINAIRES DU ROYAUME-UNI
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial
Corrigendum
ESTADOS UNIDOS - ESTABLECIMIENTO DE DERECHOS COMPENSATORIOS
SOBRE DETERMINADOS PRODUCTOS DE ACERO AL CARBONO ALEADO
CON PLOMO Y BISMUTO Y LAMINADO EN CALIENTE
ORIGINARIOS DEL REINO UNIDO
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
Corrigendum
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Japan and the European Communities Note by the Secretariat
Date: 25 March 1999
Document codes: WT/DS139/3; WT/DS142/3; WT/DS139/2; WT/DS142/2
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of
Japan and the European Communities
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 1 February 1999, the DSB established panels pursuant to requests by Japan
() and the European Communities (). The DSB agreed, pursuant to
Article 9.1 of the DSU, that a single panel should examine both complaints.
2. At that 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 Japan and the European Communities in documents and
 respectively, the matter referred to the DSB by Japan and the European
Communities in those documents 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 March 1999, the European Communities and Japan jointly requested the Director-
General, pursuant to Article 8.7 of the DSU, to determine the composition of the Panel. Article 8.7 of
the DSU 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 composition of the panel by appointing the
panelists 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 dispute. The Chairman of the 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. The Director-General has accordingly determined the composition of the panel as follows:
Chairman: Mr. Ronald Saborío Soto
Members: Mr. Timothy Groser
Mr. Rudolf Ramsauer
5. India, Korea and the United States have reserved their third-party rights in the dispute.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 1 October 1999
Document codes: WT/DS139/4; WT/DS142/4
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 30 September 1999, addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the DSU.
Article 12.8 of the DSU stipulates that the period in which a panel shall conduct its
examination, from the date that the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed
upon until the date 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 1 February 1999. The Director-General composed the Panel, pursuant to
Article 8.7 of the DSU, on 25 March 1999.
It now appears that due to the complex nature of the case, it will not be possible for the Panel
to complete its work within the six months referred to in Article 12.8 of the DSU. Accordingly, and
in line with Appendix 3 of the DSU, the Panel has adjusted the calendar and now expects to issue the
final report to the parties by mid-November 1999.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 28 April 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/6; WT/DS142/6
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 28 April 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.
Canada 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
2 March 2000 with the result that the 60-day period will expire on Monday, 1 May 2000. Due to the
time required for completion and translation of the Report, the Appellate Body will not be able to
circulate its Report by 1 May 2000. We estimate that the Appellate Body Report in this appeal will be
circulated to WTO Members no later than Wednesday, 31 May 2000.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 30 May 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/7; WT/DS142/7; WT/DS139/AB/R; WT/DS142/AB/R.
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 30 May 2000, from Mr. Florentino Feliciano, 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 tomorrow, 31 May 2000, to Members of the , 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. Claus-Dieter Ehlermann, as Presiding Member;
Mr. James Bacchus and myself, as Members.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Communication from Canada
Date: 19 July 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/9; WT/DS142/9
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING
THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 19 July 2000, from the Permanent Mission of Canada to
the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of Canada.
As you will recall, on 19 June 2000, the DSB adopted the panel and Appellate Body reports in
"". Pursuant to Article 21.3 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Canada is required to
inform the DSB of its intentions in respect of implementation within 30 days after the date of adoption
of the panel and Appellate Body reports.
The DSB recommended that Canada bring its measures found to be inconsistent with
Canada's obligations under Articles I:1 and III:4 of the GATT 1994, Article XVII of the GATS and
Article 3.1(a) of the SCM Agreement into conform ity with its obligations under those agreements.
With respect to the measure found to be inconsistent with Article 3.1(a) of the SCM Agreement, the
DSB recommended that Canada withdraw the export subsidy within 90 days.
Canada will comply with the DSB recommendations and rulings in this dispute.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings Appointment of Arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
Date: 23 August 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/11; WT/DS142/11
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING
THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings
Appointment of Arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
The following communication, dated 23 August 2000, from the Permanent Mission of
Canada, the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and the Permanent Mission of Japan,
to the Director-General, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.
We refer you to the communication dated 4 August 2000 from Japan and the European
Communities, requesting binding arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (the DSU) to determine the reasonable period of
time for Canada to implement the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body
(the DSB) in the matter (WT/DS139;
WT/DS142; AB-2000-2) adopted 19 June 2000.
Canada, Japan and the European Communities, the parties to the dispute, have agreed on an
arbitrator pursuant to footnote 12 of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU: Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró. We would
ask that you officially convey to Mr. Lacarte-Muró our agreement that he act as arbitrator in this
matter. We would also appreciate that he be assisted in his functions, as arbitrator under
Article 21.3(c) of the DSU, by the staff of the Appellate Body Secretariat.
The parties note that when the reasonable period of time for implementation is determined
through binding arbitration, Article 21.3(c) of the DSU requires that this process be completed within
90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. As the reports in
this dispute were adopted on 19 June 2000, this 90-day period will expire on 17 September 2000. We,
the parties to this dispute, have agreed to extend the period of time for this binding arbitration until
6 October 2000. We have agreed that the award of the arbitrator, made no later than 6 October 2000,
shall be deemed to be the award of the arbitrator for the purposes of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in
determining the reasonable period of time for Cana da to implement the recommendations and rulings
of the DSB.
CANADA - CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Appellate Body Report and Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body On 19 June 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on "Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry " (WT/DS139/AB/R- WT/DS142/AB/R) and the panel report (WT/DS139/ R-WT/DS142/R), as modified by the Appellate Body report.  The panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body report. CANADA - CERTAINES MESURES CONCERNANT L'INDUSTRIE AUTOMOBILE Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Le 19 juin 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel sur l'affaire Canada - Certaines mesures concernant l'industrie automobile  (WT/DS139/AB/R- WT/DS142/AB/R) et le rapport du Groupe sp écial (WT/DS139/R-WT/DS142/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.
Date: 22 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/8; WT/DS142/8; WT/DS139/AB/R-; WT/DS142/AB/R; WT/DS142/R
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA - CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING
THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Appellate Body Report and Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
On 19 June 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on
" " (
) and the panel report (WT/DS139/ R-), as modified by the Appellate
Body report. The panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate Body report.
CANADA - CERTAINES MESURES CONCERNANT
L'INDUSTRIE AUTOMOBILE
Rapport de l'Organe d'appel et rapport du Groupe spécial
Le 19 juin 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de l'Organe d'appel
sur l'affaire Canada - Certaines mesures concernant l'industrie automobile (
rapport de l'Organe d'appel. Le rapport du Groupe spécial est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe
d'appel.
CANADÁ - DETERMINADAS MEDIDAS QUE AFECTAN A
LA INDUSTRIA DEL AUTOMÓVIL
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Request by the European Communities and Japan for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
Date: 8 August 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/10; WT/DS142/10
Complainant: Japan
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. II, VI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Request by the European Communities and Japan for Arbitration
under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
The following communication, dated 4 August 2000, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission and the Permanent Mission of Japan to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of these delegations.
On 19 June 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the recommendations and rulings of
the Appellate Body and Panel Report in the proceeding, "Canada – Measures affecting the
Automotive Industry". In view of the impossibility to reach an agreement with Canada on the period
of time required for the implementation of those recommendations and rulings, the European
Communities and Japan hereby request that such period be determined by binding arbitration pursuant
to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU).
Pursuant to footnote 12 of the DSU, the representatives of the European Communities and
Japan will immediately open disc ussions with Canada with a view to achieving agreement on an
arbitrator within the next ten days.
We would be grateful if you could circulate this request to the Members of the Dispute
Settlement Body.
CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Document: Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
Date: 3 October 2000
Document codes: WT/DS139/13; WT/DS142/13
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Canada
Third parties: India, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I:1, III:4  GATT 1994Art. 3.1(a)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. II  Services (GATS)Art. 3.1(b), 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)Art. XVII  Services (GATS)

CANADA – CERTAIN MEASURES AFFECTING THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
The following communication, dated 3 October 2000, from the Arbitrator,
Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró, to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes.
I am pleased to send you a copy of my Arbitration Award in , pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATIONS REGARDING UNBLEACHED COTTON FABRICS FROM INDIA
Document: Request to Join Consultations
Date: 25 August 1998
Document codes: WT/DS140/2
Complainant: India
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 15  Anti-dumpingArt. I, VI  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATIONS
REGARDING UNBLEACHED COTTON FABRICS FROM INDIA
Request to Join Consultations
The following communication, dated 17 August 1998, from the Permanent Mission of
Pakistan to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to the procedures laid down in Ar ticle 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) read in conjunction with the footnote to
Article 4.11 of the DSU, Pakistan requests to be joined in the consultations requested by India
regarding the EU's anti-dumping actions on unbleached cotton fabrics.
Being a significant exporter of these products to the European Union, Pakistan has a
substantial interest in the matter.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON IMPORTS OF COTTON-TYPE BED-LINEN FROM INDIA
Document: Request for Consultations from India
Date: 7 August 1998
Document codes: WT/DS141/1; G/L/253; G/ADP/D13/1
Complainant: India
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Egypt, Japan, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. VI, I  GATT 1994Art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 12  Anti-dumping

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON IMPORTS
OF COTTON-TYPE BED-LINEN FROM INDIA
Request for Consultations from India
The following communication, dated 3 August 1998, from the Permanent Mission of India to
the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and 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 Commission
(EC) pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes, 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 regarding Commission
Regulation (EC) N°2398/97 of 28 November 1997 on imports of cotton-type bed-linen from India.
2. The EC initiated anti-dumping proceedings against the import of cotton type bed linen from
India by publishing a notice of initiation in September 1996.
1 Provisional anti-dumping duties were
imposed by EC Commission Regulation N°.1069/97 dated 12 June 1997. This was followed by the
imposition of final duties by the above-mentioned EC Council Regulation of 28 November 1997.
3. The Government of India considers that the determination of standing, the initiation, the
determination of dumping and injury as well as the explanations of the EC authorities' findings are
inconsistent with WTO law. India is also of the vi ew that EC authorities' establishment of the facts
was not proper and that EC's evaluation of facts was not unbiased and objective. Moreover, the EC
authorities have not taken into account the special situation of India as a developing country.
4. The Government of India considers that infringements of the following provisions have taken
place:
(i) The following provisions of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of
GATT 1994:
(a) Article 2.2.2,
(b) Article 3, specially Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5,
(c) Article 4.1(i), and Article 5.4, alone and both in conjunction with Article 3,

1 Published in the Official Journal of the European Communities C266/2 of 13.9.96.

(d) Article 5, specially Articles 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.8,
(e) Article 15,
(f) (a) through (e), each alone and in conjunction with Article 12,
as well as,
(g) Article 12, including Article 12.2.2,
(h) Article 6;
(ii) Article VI of GATT 1994;
(iii) Article I of GATT 1994.
We look forward to receiving your reply to the present request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for consultations in this regard.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON IMPORTS OF COTTON-TYPE BED-LINEN FROM INDIA
Document: Request to Join Consultations
Date: 25 August 1998
Document codes: WT/DS141/2
Complainant: India
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Egypt, Japan, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. VI, I  GATT 1994Art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 12  Anti-dumping

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON IMPORTS
OF COTTON-TYPE BED-LINEN FROM INDIA
Request to Join Consultations
The following communication, dated 17 August 1998, from the Permanent Mission of
Pakistan to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to the procedures laid down in Ar ticle 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) read in conjunction with the footnote to
Article 4.11 of the DSU, Pakistan requests to be joined in the consultations requested by India
regarding the EU's anti-dumping actions on cotton-type bed-linen.
Being a significant exporter of these products to the European Union, Pakistan has a
substantial interest in the matter.