Market access

El 18 de septiembre de 2000, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Comunidades Europeas - Medidas que afectan al amianto y a los productos que contienen amianto”.

On 1 December 2008, Canada requested consultations with the United States concerning certain mandatory country of origin labelling (COOL) provisions in the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 as amended by the 2008 Farm Bill and as implemented through an Interim Final Rule of 28 July 2008. These include the obligation to inform consumers at the retail level of the country of origin in respect of covered commodities, including beef and pork. The eligibility for a designation of a covered commodity as exclusively having a US origin can only be derived from an animal that was exclusively born, raised and slaughtered in the United States. This would exclude such a designation in respect of beef or pork derived from livestock that is exported to the United States for feed or immediate slaughter.

Le 16 mai, l’Organe d’appel de l’OMC a publié son rapport dans l’affaire “Union européenne — Mesures compensatoires visant certains types de polyéthyène téréphthalate en provenance du Pakistan” (DS486)

On 6 November 2000, Turkey requested consultations with Egypt concerning an anti-dumping investigation by the Egyptian Ministry of Trade and Supply with respect to imports of rebar from Turkey. The investigation was completed and the final report released on 21 October 1999. As a result of the investigation, anti-dumping duties were imposed, ranging from 22.63-61.00 per cent ad valorem. Turkey considered that: Egypt made determinations of injury and dumping in that investigation without a proper establishment of the facts and based on an evaluation of the facts that was neither unbiased nor objective; during the investigation of material injury or threat thereof and the causal link, Egypt acted inconsistently with Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 6.1 and 6.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and during the investigation of sales at less than normal value, Egypt violated Article X:3 of the GATT 1994, as well as Articles 2.2, 2.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.6, 6.7 and 6.8, and Annex II, Paragraphs 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 and Annex I, Paragraph 7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 5 October 1995, Canada requested consultations with Australia in respect of Australia’s prohibition of imports of salmon from Canada based on a quarantine regulation. Canada alleged that the prohibition is inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994, and also inconsistent with the SPS Agreement.

On 8 October 1997, the United States requested consultations with Canada in respect of export subsidies allegedly granted by Canada on dairy products and the administration by Canada of the tariff-rate quota on milk. The United States contended that these export subsidies by Canada distort markets for dairy products and adversely affect US sales of dairy products. The United States alleged violations of Articles II, X and X1 of the GATT 1994, Articles 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Article 3 of the SCM Agreement, and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Import Licensing Agreement.

Le 16 janvier 2003, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “États-Unis - Loi de 2000 sur la compensation pour continuation du dumping et maintien de la subvention”.

El 06 de marzo de 2006, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “México - Medidas fiscales sobre los refrescos y otras bebidas”.

On 1 June 1999, the US requested consultations with the EC in respect of the alleged lack of protection of trademarks and geographical indications (GIs) for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the EC. The US contended that EC Regulation 2081/92, as amended, does not provide national treatment with respect to geographical indications and does not provide sufficient protection to pre-existing trademarks that are similar or identical to a geographical indication. The US considered this situation to be inconsistent with the EC’s obligations under the TRIPS Agreement, including but not necessarily limited to Articles 3, 16, 24, 63 and 65 of the TRIPS Agreement...

On 20 December 2002, Canada requested consultations with the United States regarding the investigation of the USITC in Softwood Lumber from Canada (Invs. Nos. 701-TA-414 and 731-TA-928 (Final)) and the final definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties applied as a result of the USITC’s final determination made on 2 May 2002, notice of which was published in the United States Federal Register on 22 May 2002 (Volume 67, Number 99 at pp. 36022-36023) that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of softwood lumber from Canada that the Department of Commerce has determined are subsidized and sold in the United States at less than fair value. Canada claimed that, through these measures, the United States has violated its obligations under Article VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994, Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 3.8, 12 and 18.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Articles 10, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8, 22 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement.

On 17 March 1999, the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of definitive safeguard measures imposed by the US on imports of wheat gluten from the European Communities. The EC contended that by a Proclamation of 30 May 1998, and a Memorandum of the same date, by the US President, under which the US imposed definitive safeguard measures in the form of a quantitative limitation on imports of wheat gluten from the EC, effective as of 1 June 1998. The EC considered these measures to be in violation of Articles 2, 4, 5 and 12 of the Agreement on Safeguards; Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture; and Articles I and XIX of GATT 1994.

On 4 June 1997 and 15 December 1997, the EC requested consultations with Chile in respect of Chile’s Special Sales Tax on spirits, which allegedly imposes a higher tax on imported spirits than on Pisco, a locally brewed spirit. The EC’s second request (WT/DS110), takes issue with the modification to the law on taxation on alcoholic beverages passed by Chile to address the concerns of the EC in WT/DS87. The EC contended that this differential treatment of imported spirits violates Article III:2 of GATT 1994.

L’Organe d’appel a remis, le 4 avril 2012, son rapport dans l’affaire “Etats-Unis — Mesures affectant la production et la vente de cigarettes aux clous de girofle” (WT/DS406/AB/R).

El 22 de octubre de 2001, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Prohibición de importar ciertos camarones y sus productos - Recurso”.

On 8 November 2004, the European Communities filed a request for consultations with the United States asserting that the United States should have removed its retaliatory measures since the EC has removed the measures found to be WTO-inconsistent in the EC — Hormones case.

El 5 de julio de 2011 la OMC distribuyó los informes del Grupo Especial que examinó las reclamaciones de los Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y México en la diferencia “China — Medidas relativas a la exportación de diversas materias primas” (DS394, DS395 y DS398, respectivamente).

Le 17 novembre 2014, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial sur l’affaire introduite par le Viet Nam au sujet des mesures antidumping appliquées par les États-Unis à certaines crevettes vietnamiennes (DS429).

El 10 de noviembre de 2003, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Medidas de salvaguardia definitivas sobre las importaciones determinados productos de acero”.

On 28 May 1998, Canada requested consultations with the EC in respect of measures imposed by France, in particular Decree of 24 December 1996, with respect to the prohibition of asbestos and products containing asbestos, including a ban on imports of such goods. Canada alleged that these measures violate Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the SPS Agreement, Article 2 of the TBT Agreement, and Articles III, XI and XIII of GATT 1994. Canada also alleged nullification and impairment of benefits accruing to it under the various agreements cited.

Le 28 février 2001, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Mesures antidumping appliquées à certains produits en acier laminés à chaud en provenance du Japon”.

El 14 de agosto de 2003, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Examen por extinciónde los derechos antidumping sobre los productos planos de acero alcarbono resistentes a la corrosión procedentes del Japón”.

On 27 2019 June the WTO circulated the panel report in the case brought by India in “United States - Certain Measures Relating to the Renewable Energy Sector” (DS510).

Le 31 mai 2000, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Canada - Certaines mesures affectant l’industrie automobile”.

On 30 March 2006, the European Communities and the United States, and on 13 April 2006, Canada, requested consultations with China regarding China's imposition of measures that adversely affect exports of automobile parts from the European Communities, the United States and Canada to China. The measures include the following: (a) Policy on Development of Automotive Industry (Order No. 8 of the National Development and Reform Commission, 21 May 2004); (b) Measures for the Administration of Importation of Automotive Parts and Components for Complete Vehicles (Decree No. 125), which entered into force on 1 April 2005); and, (c) Rules for Determining Whether Imported Automotive Parts and Components Constitute Complete Vehicles (General Administration of Customs Public Announcement No. 4, which entered into force on 1 April 2005; as well as any amendments, replacements, extensions, implementing measures or other measures related.

Le 13 juillet 1998, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Communautés européennes - Mesures affectant l’importation de certains produits provenant de volailles”.