Market access

L’OMC a publié, le 13 décembre 2010, le rapport du Groupe spécial qui avait examiné la plainte déposée par la Chine dans l’affaire “Etats Unis — Mesures affectant les importation de certains pneumatiques pour véhicules de tourisme et camions légers en provenance de Chine” (DS399).

Le 12 mars 1998, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Communautés européennes - Mesures affectant l’importation de certains produits provenant de volailles”.

On 10 November 2000, the EC requested consultations with the US concerning the continued application by the United States of countervailing duties on a number of products. In particular, the EC claimed that the application of the “same person” methodology by the US, and the continued imposition of duties based on it, are in breach of Articles 10, 19 and 21 of the SCM Agreement, because there is no proper determination of a benefit to the producer of the goods under investigation, as required by Article 1.1(b) of the SCM Agreement. The EC included in this request for consultations 14 US countervailing duty orders1 where this “same person” methodology was applied. All these cases involve alleged non-recurring subsidies granted to firms prior to a change of ownership.

Un groupe spécial de l’OMC a publié, le 22 janvier 2010, son rapport sur une plainte déposée par la Thaïlande dans l’affaire “États-Unis — Mesures antidumping visant les sacs en polyéthylène pour le commerce de détail en provenance de Thaïlande” (DS383).

El 20 de agosto de 2001, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Trato fiscal aplicado a las “empresas de ventas en el extranjero” - Recurso”.

Le 23 juin 2005, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Japon - Mesures visant l’importation de pommes - Recours”.

Le 15 juillet 2002, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Article 129 c) 1) de la Loi sur les Accords du Cycle d’Uruguay”.

On 17 November 2005, Ecuador requested consultations with the United States concerning the final affirmative determination of sales at less than fair value with respect to certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador published by the United States Department of Commerce (DOC) on 23 December 2004, the amended final determination of sales at less than fair value on 1 February 2005 and the accompanying anti-dumping duty order. According to Ecuador, it has concerns particularly about the DOC’s practice of “zeroing” negative anti-dumping margins, based on which the DOC issued the foregoing determinations and order. Ecuador considers that the foregoing determinations and order are inconsistent with Article VI of the GATT 1994 and Articles 1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.4.2, 5.8, 6.10, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, and 18.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 5 October 2000, Argentina requested consultations with Chile concerning: - the price band system established by Law 18.525 (as subsequently amended by Law 18.591 and Law 19.546), as well as implementing regulations and complementary and/or amending provisions; and - the provisional safeguard measures adopted on 19 November 1999 by Decree No. 339 of the Ministry of Economy and the definitive safeguard measures imposed on 20 January 2000 by Decree No. 9 of the Ministry of Economy on the importation of various products, including wheat, wheat flour and edible vegetal oils. Argentina considered that these measures raised questions concerning the obligations of Chile under various agreements. According to Argentina, the provisions with which the measures relating to the said price band system are inconsistent, include, but are not limited to, the following: Article II of the GATT 1994, and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. According to Argentina, the provisions with which the safeguard measures are inconsistent, include, but are not limited to, the following: Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 12 of the Safeguards Agreement, and Article XIX:1(a) of the GATT 1994

Le 2 décembre 2019, l’OMC a distribué le rapport du Groupe spécial chargé de la mise en conformité dans l’affaire soumise par l’Union européenne intitulée “Communautés européennes et certains États membres - Mesures affectant le commerce des aéronefs civils gros porteurs - Recours de l’UE à l’article 21:5 du Mémorandum d’accord sur le règlement des différends“( DS316).