dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
Document: Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 17 October 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/13; WT/DS456/AB/R; WT/DS456/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS456/R/Add.1
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS
AND SOLAR MODULES
APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 26 October 2016 , the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body
report on India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules ( and
) and the Panel report (WT/DS 456/R and ), as modified
by the Appellate Body report. The Panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appella te
Body report.

INDE – CERTAINES MESURES RELATIVES AUX CELLULES SOLAIRES
ET AUX MODULES SOLAIRES
RAPPORT DE L'ORGANE D'APPEL ET RAPPORT DU GROUPE SPÉCIAL
À sa réunion du 26 octobre 2016, l'Orga ne de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de
l'Organe d'appel sur l'affaire Inde – Certaines mesures relatives aux cellules solaires et aux
Groupe spécial devrait être lu conjointement avec celui de l'Organe d'appel.

MÓDULOS SOLARES
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 26 de octubre de 2016, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el informe
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES COMMUNICATION FROM INDIA
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM
Date: 10 November 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/14
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
COMMUNICATION FROM INDIA
The following communication, dated 8 November 2016, was received from the delegation of India
with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB).

At its meeting on 14 October 2016, the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted its
recommendations and rulings in the dispute India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and
Solar Modules (DS456). My authorities have instruct ed me to advise the DSB of the intentions of
India with respect to implementation of the recommendations and rulings of the DSB pursuant to
Article 21.3 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
("DSU"). India and the United States have agreed that India would inform the DSB of its intentions
by letter rather than at a meeting of the DSB convened solely for this purpose.

India intends to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute in a
manner that respects its WTO obligations and is in the process of evaluating and analysing the
most appropriate way to do so. India will need a reasonable period of time for implementation.
India stands ready to discuss this matter with the United States, in accordance with Article 21.3(b)
of the DSU.

India requests that you circulate this communication to the Members of the DSB.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM
Date: 6 December 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/15
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA CONCERNING
ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 1 December 2016 , from the delegation of the United States
and the delegation of India to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the
request of these delegations.

At its meeting on 14 October 2016, the Dispute Settlement Body ( "DSB") adopted its
recommendations and rulings in the dispute India — Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and
Solar Modules (DS456). In its communication to the DSB dated 8 November 2016 and at the
meeting of the DSB held on 23 November 2016, India announced its intention to implement the
DSB’s recommend ations and rulings in this dispute and stated that it would need a reasonable
period of time in which to do so.
Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes ("DSU") provides that, in the absence of an agreement between the parties on a period of
time, the reasonable period of time shall be determined "through binding arbitration within 90
days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings."
In order to allow sufficient time for the partie s to discuss a mutually agreed period, India and the
United States (i) agree that, in the event an arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU is
requested, it shall be completed no later than 60 days after the date of the appointment of an
arbitrator, unless the arbitrator, following consultation with the parties, considers that additional
time is required; and (ii) hereby confirm that any award of the arbitrator (including an award not
made within 90 days after the date of adoption of the DSB recommendat ions and rulings) shall be
deemed to be an award of the arbitrator for the purposes of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in
determining the reasonable period of time for India to implement the recommendations and
rulings of the DSB.
We respectfully request that you circulate this notification to the Members of the DSB.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
Document: AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3
Date: 20 June 2017
Document codes: WT/DS456/16
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 16 June 2017, from the delegation of India and the delegation
of the United States to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.

We wish to inform you that, pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), the Un ited States and India have
agreed that the reasonable period of time for India to implement the recommendations and rulings
of the Dispute Settlement Body ( "DSB") in the dispute India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar
Cells and Solar Modules (WT/DS456) shall be 14 months from the October 14, 2016, date of
adoption of the DSB recommendations and rulings. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time
expires on December 14, 2017.

 We request that you circulate this notification to the Members of the DSB.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES STATUS REPORT REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DSB RECOMMENDATIONS AND RULINGS BY INDIA
Document: STATUS REPORT
Date: 18 December 2017
Document codes: WT/DS456/17
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
STATUS REPORT REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
DSB RECOMMENDATIONS AND RULINGS BY INDIA
The following communication, dated 14 December 2017, from the delegation of India to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the DSU.

India submits this status report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU").

On 14 October 2016 the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted the recommendations and
rulings in India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Modules (WT/DS456) . In its
communication to the DSB dated 8 November 2016 and at the meeting of the DSB held on 23
November 2016, India announced its intention to implement the DSB’s recommendations and
rulings in this dispute and stated that it would need a reasonable period of time in which to do so.

On 16 June 2017, India and the United States informed the DSB that they had agreed that the
reasonable period of time to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings would be 14
months. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time was set to expire on 14 December 2017.

Indian authorities have held extensiv e internal stakeholder consultations since the adoption of the
rulings and recommendations of the DSB to fully comply with them.

Accordingly, in compliance with the findings and recommendations of the DSB in this dispute,
India has ceased to impose any m easures as found inconsistent in the DSB’s findings and
recommendations.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.2 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES
Document: panel report
Date: 20 December 2017
Document codes: WT/DS456/18
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS
AND SOLAR MODULES
RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.2 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES
The following communication, dated 19 December 2017, from the delegation of the United States
to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 22.2 of the
DSU.

The United States considers that India has failed to comply with the recommendations and rulings
of the Dispute Settlement Body ( "DSB") in the dispute India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar
Cells and Modules (DS456) ("India – Solar Cells"). Pursuant to Article 22.2 of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), the United States
requests authorization from the DSB to suspend concessions or other obligations with respect to
India at an annual level based on a formula commensurate with the trade effects caused to the
interests of the United States by the failure of India to comply with the recommendations and
rulings of the DSB.
On 14 October 2016, the DSB adopted the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report,
in India — Solar Cells, finding that India 's domestic content requirements ( "DCR measures") for
solar cells and modules breach Article 2.1 of the Agreement on Trade -Related Investment
Measures ("TRIMs Agreement") and Article III:4 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
1994 ("GATT 1994 "). Accordingly, the DSB recommended that India "bring its measures into
conformity with its obligations under the TRIMs Agreement and the GATT 1994."
The United States and India agreed that the reasonable period of time for India to implement the
DSB's recommendations and rulings would expire on 14 Dece mber 2017. In the view of the
United States, India failed to bring its measures into compliance with the recommendations and
rulings of the DSB within that period. The parties have not reached agreement on compensation.
Therefore, the United States is entitled to authorization by the DSB to take countermeasures under
Article 22 of the DSU.
In considering what countermeasures to take, the United States follows the principles and
procedures set forth in Article 22.3 of the DSU. The countermeasures would consist of suspension
of tariff concessions and related obligations (including most -favored-nation obligations) under the
General Agreement on Ta riffs and Trade 1994 on a list of products of India to be drawn from the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.
We request that you please circulate this notification to the Members of the DSB.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
Document: Appellate Body Report
Date: 9 August 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/11
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following communication, dated 8 July 2016, from the Chair of the Appellate Body addressed
to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulat ed to Members in accordance with
Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.

I refer to the letter from the Chair of the Appellate Body of 17 June 2016, setting out the reasons
why the Appellate Body would not be able to circulate its R eport in these proceedings within the
90-day timeframe provided for in Article 17.5 of the DSU. We can now inform you that we expect to
circulate the Appellate Body Report in this appeal no later than Friday, 16 September 2016.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
Document: Report of the Appellate Body
Date: 20 September 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/12; WT/DS456/AB/R
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following communication, dated 16 September 2016, from the Chair of the Appellate Body
addressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is ci rculated to Members in accordance
with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes.

It is my honour to provide to you the Report of the Appellate Body in India – Certain Measures
Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules (). It will be circulated to Members of
the at approximately 5.00 p.m. today, in accordance with Article 17.5 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 Peter Van den Bossche, as Presiding Member, and Mr Seung Wha Chang and
Mr Thomas Graham, as Members.
INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS AND SOLAR MODULES
Document: APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT Action by the Dispute Settlement Body Corrigendum The date in the first  sentence in document WT/DS456/13, should read "14 October 2016" instead of "26 October 2016". INDE – CERTAINES MESURES RELATIVES AUX CELLULES SOLAIRES ET AUX MODULES SOLAIRES RAPPORT DE L'ORGANE D'APPEL ET RAPPORT DU GROUPE SPÉCIAL Dispositions prises par l'Organe de règlement des différends Corrigendum À la première phrase du doc ument WT/DS456/13, il convient de remplacer la date du "26 octobre 2016" par celle du "14 octobre 2016".
Date: 19 October 2016
Document codes: WT/DS456/13/Corr.1; WT/DS456/13; WT/DS456/13
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: India
Third parties: Brazil, Canada, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. III:4  GATT 1994Art. 2.1  Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)

INDIA – CERTAIN MEASURES RELATING TO SOLAR CELLS
AND SOLAR MODULES

APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Corrigendum
The date in the first sentence in document , should read "14 October 2016" instead
of "26 October 2016".

INDE – CERTAINES MESURES RELATIVES AUX CELLULES
RAPPORT DE L'ORGANE D'APPEL ET RAPPORT DU GROUPE SPÉCIAL
Corrigendum

INDIA - DETERMINADAS MEDIDAS RELATIVAS A LAS CÉLULAS
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
Corrigendum
de 2016" y no "26 de octubre de 2016".
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF GUATEMALA NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
Document: NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
Date: 23 September 2013
Document codes: WT/DS457/3; WT/DS457/2; WT/DS457/2
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF
CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF GUATEMALA
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
1. At its meeting on 23 July 2013, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a panel
pursuant to the request of Guatemala in document , in accordance with Article 6 of
the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).

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

To examine, in the light of the relevant pr ovisions of the covered agreements cited by
the parties to the dispute, the matter referred to the DSB by Guatemala 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. Following the agreement of the parties, the Panel was composed on 19 September 2013 as
follows:

 Chairperson: Mr Gary Horlick

 Members: Ms Enie Neri De Ross
 Mr Miguel Rodríguez Mendoza

4. Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia
1, Ecuador, El Salvador, the European Union, Honduras,
India, the Republic of Korea and the United States have reserved their rights to participate in the
Panel proceedings as third parties.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM
Date: 18 March 2014
Document codes: WT/DS457/4
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF
CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 17 March 2014, was received from the Chairperson of the
Panel with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body.

Article 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Pr ocedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(DSU) provides that the period in which a panel shall conduct its examination, from the date that
the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed upon until the date the final
report is issued to the parties to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.

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

The Panel in Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products (WT/DS457) was
established by the DSB on 23 July 2013 and composed on 19 September 2013.

The Panel expects to issue its final report to the parties by September 2014, in accordance with
the timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM
Date: 29 September 2014
Document codes: WT/DS457/5; WT/DS457/4
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF
CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 25 September 2014, was received from the Chairperson
of the Panel with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body.

The Panel, in its communication to the Dispute Settlement Body dated 17 March 2014
(), indicated that it expected to issue its final report to the parties to the dispute
in September 2014. In light of modifications to th e timetable that were requested by the parties,
the Panel expects to issue its final report to the parties in October 2014.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM
Date: 2 June 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/9
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 22 May 2015, from the Chair of the Appellate Body addressed to
the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circul ated to Members 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
(the "DSB") of its decision to appeal. Article 17.5 states, furthermore, that when the Appellate Body
considers that it cannot provide its Report within 60 days, it shall inform the DSB in writing of the
reasons for the delay together with an estimate of the period within which it will submit its Report.

Peru notified the DSB on 25 March 2015 of its decision to appeal certain issues of law covered in the
Panel Report and legal interpretations developed by the Panel in this case, with the result that the
60-day period expires on Sunday, 24 May 2015. Due to the time required for completion and
translation of the Report, the Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its Report by this date.

The Appellate Body has faced a substantial workload in the first half of 2015, with several appeals
proceeding in parallel, and there has been overlap in the composition of the Divisions hearing
these different appeals during this period. Due to the scheduling issues arising from these
circumstances and the number and complexity of the issues raised in this and concurrent appeal
proceedings, together with the demands that these concurrent appeals place on the
WTO Secretariat's translation services, and shortage of staff in the Appellate Body Secretariat, the
Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its report in this dispute within the 90-day timeframe
provided for in Article 17.5 of the DSU.

For these reasons, we estimate that the Appellate Bo dy report in this appeal will be circulated to
WTO Members no later than Monday, 20 July 2015.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
Document: Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 3 August 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/11; WT/DS457/AB/R; WT/DS457/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS457/R; WT/DS457/R/Add.1
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 31 July 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report on
Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products ( and
) and the Panel report ( and ), as modified
by the Appellate Body report. The Panel report should be read in conjunction with the Appellate
Body report.

PÉROU – DROIT ADDITIONNEL VISANT LES IMPORTATIONS
DE CERTAINS PRODUITS AGRICOLES
RAPPORT DE L'ORGANE D'APPEL ET RAPPORT DU GROUPE SPÉCIAL
À sa réunion du 31 juillet 2015, l'Organe de règlement des différends a adopté le rapport de
l'Organe d'appel intitulé Pérou – Droit additionnel visant les importations de certains produits
Groupe spécial est à rapprocher de celui de l'Organe d'appel.

DETERMINADOS PRODUCTOS AGROPECUARIOS
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 31 de julio de 2015, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el informe
determinados productos agropecuarios ( y ) y el informe
de Apelación.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
Document: NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT On 1 October 2015, pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Guatemala referred to arbitration the matter of the reasonable period of time for Peru to implemen t the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products (DS457). By joint letter dated 9 October 2015, Peru and Guatemala agreed on Mr Ricardo Ramírez-Hernández to serve as arbitrator pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. In a letter dated 9 October 2015, Mr Ramírez-Hernández informed Peru and Guatemala that he accepts the appointment to serve as arbitrator.
Date: 15 October 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/14
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C)
OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES
GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
On 1 October 2015, pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Guatemala referred to arbitration the matter of the
reasonable period of time for Peru to implemen t the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB) in Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products
(DS457).

By joint letter dated 9 October 2015, Peru and Guatemala agreed on Mr Ricardo Ramírez-Hernández
to serve as arbitrator pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. In a letter dated 9 October 2015,
Mr Ramírez-Hernández informed Peru and Guatemala that he accepts the appointment to serve as
arbitrator.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
Document: Report of the Appellate Body
Date: 21 July 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/10; WT/DS457/AB/R; WT/DS457/AB/R/Add.1.
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 20 July 2015, fr om the Chair of the Appellate Body addressed to
the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circul ated to Members in accordance with Article 17.5
of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.

It is my honour to provide to you the Report of the Appellate Body in Peru – Additional Duty on
Imports of Certain Agricultural Products, and It will be
circulated to Members of the at 4.00 p.m. today, in accordance with
Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Pr ocedures 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 Ujal Singh Bhatia, as Presiding Member, Mr Tom Graham and
Ms Yuejiao Zhang, as Members.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS COMMUNICATION FROM GUATEMALA AND PERU CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(B) AND 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
Document: Appellate Body report
Date: 17 September 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/12
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
COMMUNICATION FROM GUATEMALA AND PERU CONCERNING
ARTICLE 21.3(B) AND 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 14 Septembe r 2015, from the delegation of Guatemala and
the delegation of Peru to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the
request of these delegations.

On 31 July 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted the Panel and Appellate Body
reports in Peru — Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products (WT/DS457). At the
same meeting of the DSB, Peru notified the DSB that it intends to implement the
recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute, and stated that it would need a
reasonable period of time for implementation. At the DSB meeting of 31 August 2015, Peru
reiterated that it would need a reasonable period of time for implementation.

Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) provides that in the absence of a time proposed by the Member concerned and
approved by the DSB the reasonable period of time shall be "a period of time mutually agreed by
the parties to the dispute within 45 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and
rulings." Article 21.3(c) of the DSU provides th at, in the absence of an agreement between the
parties on a period of time, the reasonable period of time shall be determined "through binding
arbitration within 90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings."

In order to allow sufficient time for the parties for further discussions, Guatemala and Peru
(i) agree that any agreement between the partie s on a reasonable period of time shall be
considered to be an agreement under Article 21.3(b) even if concluded outside the 45 days period;
(ii) equally agree that an arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU shall be completed no later
than 60 days after the date of the appointment of an arbitrator, unless the arbitrator, following
consultation with the parties, considers that addi tional time is required; and (iii) hereby confirm
that any award of the arbitrator (including awards not made within 90 days after the date of
adoption of the recommendations and rulings) shall be deemed to be an award of the arbitrator for
the purposes of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in determ ining the reasonable period of time for Peru to
implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.

For Guatemala For Peru

Eduardo Sperisen Yurt
Ambassador

Luis Enrique Chavez Basagoitia
Ambassador
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS REQUEST BY GUATEMALA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
Document: Appellate Body Report
Date: 5 October 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/13
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
REQUEST BY GUATEMALA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 1 October 2015 from the delegation of Guatemala to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.

On 31 July 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body (" DSB") adopted the rulings and recommendations
of the Panel Report, as modified by the Appellate Body Report, in Peru – Additional Duty on
Imports of Certain Agricultural Products (DS457). At the DSB meeting held on 31 August 2015,
Peru stated that it intended to implement th e rulings and recommendations of the DSB, and
requested a reasonable period of time to do so.

Pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Guatemala held consultations with Peru aimed at reaching a
mutually agreed reasonable period of time for implementation of the DSB's rulings and
recommendations. The parties extended the period in which to engage in discussion to arrive at a
mutually agreed solution in a letter dated 14 September 2015.1 However, to date, the parties have
not been able to reach an agreement. Accordingly, Guatemala requests that the reasonable period
of time be determined through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.

Guatemala looks forward to consulting with Peru on the appointment of the arbitrator within the
next ten days, as provided in footnote 12 of the DSU.
PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
Document: Arbitration Award
Date: 17 December 2015
Document codes: WT/DS457/16
Complainant: Guatemala
Respondent: Peru
Third parties: Argentina, China, El Salvador, EU, India, U.S., Brazil, Ecuador, South Korea, Honduras, Colombia
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. II:1, XI:1, X:1, X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7  Customs valuationArt. 3.8  Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU)

PERU – ADDITIONAL DUTY ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
The following communication, dated 16 December 2015, from the Arbitrator,
Mr Ricardo Ramírez-Hernández, to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 21.3(c) of the Unders tanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes.

I am pleased to provide you with a copy of my Arbitration Award in Peru – Additional Duty on
Imports of Certain Agricultural Products (DS457), pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding
on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. It will be circulated to the
Members of the WTO at approximately 4 p.m. this afternoon. The Award is a confidential document
pending its circulation.
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA
Document: COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA
Date: 14 May 2013
Document codes: WT/DS458/2
Complainant: Cuba
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Dominican, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S., China, Nigeria, Indonesia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Ecuador
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 3.1, 15.1, 15.4, 16.1, 16.3, 17, 22.2(b), 20, 24.3  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4, IX  GATT 1994

AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA
 The following communication, dated 8 May 2013, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegation of Australia, the delegation of Cuba and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

In accordance with Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes (DSU), the Government of Canada hereby notifies its desire to join in the
consultations requested by Cuba under Article 4 of the DSU, Article XXII of the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade 1994 , Article 64.1 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights and Article 14.1 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade with respect to
certain Australian measures relating to trademarks, geographical indications and other plain
packaging requirements applicable to tobacco products and packaging.

The relevant communication from the Perman ent Mission of Cuba, dated 3 May 2013, was
circulated to WTO Members on 7 May 2013, as Australia – Certain Measures Concerning
Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to
Tobacco Products and Packaging (, , , ).

Canada has a substantial trade interest in these proceedings as an importer of tobacco
products and the interpretation of WTO obligations in this dispute could materially affect Canadian
domestic measures. Accordingly, Canada requests to join in these consultations.

A copy of this letter is being sent to the Ch airman of the Dispute Settlement Body with a
request that it be circulated to Members.
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Document: Communication from New Zealand
Date: 14 May 2013
Document codes: WT/DS458/3
Complainant: Cuba
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Dominican, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S., China, Nigeria, Indonesia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Ecuador
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 3.1, 15.1, 15.4, 16.1, 16.3, 17, 22.2(b), 20, 24.3  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4, IX  GATT 1994

AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Communication from New Zealand
 The following communication, dated 8 May 2013, from the delegation of New Zealand to the
delegation of Australia, the delegation of Cuba and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes (DSU) , New Zealand hereby notifies the Governments of Australia and
Cuba as well as the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) that it wishes to be joined in the consultations
requested by Cuba in the document circulated to WTO Members on 7 May 2013 entitled "Australia
– Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geog raphical Indications and Other Plain Packaging
Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging” (, , ,

New Zealand has a substantial trade interest in the subject of the consultations and a
systemic interest in the application and interpretation of the provisions of the Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights , the Agreement on Technical Barriers to
Trade, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.

New Zealand looks forward to confirmation of receipt and acceptance of this request and
advice regarding the timing and venue for the consultations. I have further requested that this
communication be circulated to the Members of the DSB.
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Document: Communication from Norway
Date: 16 May 2013
Document codes: WT/DS458/4
Complainant: Cuba
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Dominican, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S., China, Nigeria, Indonesia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Ecuador
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 3.1, 15.1, 15.4, 16.1, 16.3, 17, 22.2(b), 20, 24.3  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4, IX  GATT 1994

AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Communication from Norway
 The following communication, dated 13 May 2013, from the delegation of Norway to the
delegation of Australia, the delegation of Cuba and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

My authorities have instructed me to request, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the WTO
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governin g the Settlement of Disputes, that Norway be
joined in the consultations requested by Cuba on 3 May 2013 in a communication circulated to
Members on 7 May 2013 entitled Australia – Certain Measures concerning Trademarks,
Geographical Indications and other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products
and Packaging ().

Norway is currently in the process of implementing revisions to its own tobacco policy, and
has already introduced a number of measures in order to reduce smoking. Norway thus has a
substantial trade interest in this dispute.

Norway looks forward to receiving Australia’s reply to this request.
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Document: Communication from Ukraine
Date: 17 May 2013
Document codes: WT/DS458/5; WT/DS458/1; G/L/1026; G/TBT/D43; IP/D/33
Complainant: Cuba
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Dominican, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S., China, Nigeria, Indonesia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Ecuador
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 3.1, 15.1, 15.4, 16.1, 16.3, 17, 22.2(b), 20, 24.3  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4, IX  GATT 1994

AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Communication from Ukraine
 The following communication, dated 14 May 2013, from the delegation of Ukraine to the
delegation of Australia, the delegation of Cuba and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

I have the honour to refer to a communication circulated to WTO Members on 7 May 2013
(, , , ) entitled Australia – Certain Measures Concerning
Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to
Tobacco Products and Packaging by which Cuba requests to hold consultations with Australia.

Ukraine is an important producer and export er of tobacco products and therefore has a
substantial trade interest as well as a systemic interest in the present dispute.

In view of the above and pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes , my authorities have instructed me to notify
hereby the Governments of Australia, of Cuba an d the Dispute Settlement Body of a desire of
Ukraine to be joined in the consultations requested by Cuba.
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Document: Communication from Honduras
Date: 17 May 2013
Document codes: WT/DS458/6
Complainant: Cuba
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Dominican, EU, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, U.S., China, Nigeria, Indonesia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Ecuador
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 3.1, 15.1, 15.4, 16.1, 16.3, 17, 22.2(b), 20, 24.3  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4, IX  GATT 1994

AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REQUEST TO JOIN CONSULTATIONS
Communication from Honduras
 The following communication, dated 13 May 2013, from the delegation of Honduras to the
delegation of Australia, the delegation of Cuba and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes , Honduras notifies the consulting Members and the Dispute Settlement
Body of its desire to be joined in the consultations requested by Cuba in Australia – Certain
Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging
Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging. This request for consultations was
circulated to WTO Members on May 7, 2013 ().

 Honduras has a substantial trade interest in these consultations. Honduras is a major
producer and exporter of tobacco products.

 The Government of Honduras looks forward to receiving your reply.