About the WTO

The US appealed on 21 February 1996. On 22 April, the Appellate Body issued its report, modifying the panel report on the interpretation of GATT Article XX(g), but concluding that Article XX(g) was not applicable in this case. The Appellate Report, together with the panel report as modified by the Appellate Report, was adopted by the DSB on 20 May 1996.

Le 19 octobre 2016, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire engagée par la Chine “États-Unis — Certaines méthodes et leur application aux procédures antidumping visant la Chine” (DS471)

On 27 June 2005, the European Communities requested consultations with the United States concerning prohibited and actionable subsidies provided to US producers of large civil aircraft. (See also dispute DS317). The European Communities considers that the measures cited in its request for consultations are inconsistent with: - Articles 3.1(a), 3.1(b), 3.2, 5(a), 5(c), 6.3(a), 6.3(b) and 6.3(c) of the SCM Agreement; and - Article III:4 of the GATT 1994

On 13 March 2012, the United States requested consultations with China with respect to China’s restrictions on the export of various forms of rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum. The request refers to materials falling under but not limited to 212 eight-digit Chinese Customs Commodity Codes and over 30 measures. The request also refers to a number of Chinese published as well as unpublished measures that, operating separately or collectively, allegedly impose and administer export restrictions. These restrictions include export duties, export quotas, minimum export price requirements, export licensing requirements and additional requirements and procedures in connection with the administration of the quantitative restrictions.

Le 22 juillet 2003, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Communautés européennes - Droits antidumping sur les accessoires de tuyauterie en fonte malléable en provenance du Brésil”.

On 4 June 2004, Indonesia requested consultations with Korea concerning the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties by Korea on imports of business information paper and uncoated wood-free printing paper from Indonesia and certain aspects of the investigation leading to the imposition of such duties.

El 16 de enero de 2003, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Ley de compensaciónpor continuación del dumping o mantenimiento de las subvencionesde 2000”.

L’OMC a publié, le 29 février 2008, les rapports des groupes spéciaux sur les plaintes déposées par la Thaïlande et l’Inde, respectivement, dans les affaires “Etats-Unis — Mesures antidumping visant les crevettes en provenance de Thaïlande” (DS343) et “Etats-Unis — Directive sur les cautions en douane pour les marchandises assujetties à des droits antidumping/compensateurs” (DS345).

On 16 March 2004, the United States requested consultations with Mexico concerning certain tax measures imposed by Mexico on soft drinks and other beverages that use any sweetener other than cane sugar.

On 10 March 1997, Brazil requested consultations with Canada in respect of certain subsidies granted by the Government of Canada or its provinces intended to support the export of civilian aircraft. The request was made pursuant to Article 4 of the SCM Agreement. Brazil contended that these measures are inconsistent with Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.

Le 02 avril 2004, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Mexique - Mesures visant les services de télécommunication”.

El 08 de noviembre de 1996, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Restricciones aplicadas a las importaciones de ropa interior de algodón y fibras sintéticas o artificiales”.

On 12 April 2013, Guatemala requested consultations with Peru with respect to the imposition by Peru of an “additional duty” on imports of certain agricultural products, such as rice, sugar, maize, milk and certain dairy products. Guatemala claims that the measure at issue is inconsistent with: - Article 4.2 and footnote 1 of the Agreement on Agriculture; - Articles II:1(a), II:1(b), X:1, X:3(a), XI and XI:1 of the GATT 1994; and - Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of the Customs Valuation Agreement.

Le 11 juillet 2019, l’OMC a distribué deux rapports du Groupe spécial chargé des affaires “États-Unis — Certaines mesures visant les produits en acier et en aluminium” (DS550) et “États-Unis — Certaines mesures visant les produits en acier et en aliminium” (DS551) introduites par le Canada et le Mexique, respectivement.

Le 12 septembre 2005, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Communautés européennes - Classification douanière des morceaux de poulet désossés et congelés”.

On 13 June 2000, Korea requested consultations with the United States in respect of the definitive safeguard measure imposed by the United States on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe (line pipe). Korea noted that on 18 February 2000 the United States proclaimed a definitive safeguard measure on imports of line pipe (subheadings 7306.10.10 and 7306.10.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States). In that proclamation, the United States announced that the proposed date of introduction of the measure was 1 March 2000 and that the measure was expected to remain in effect for 3 years and 1 day. Korea considered that the US procedures and determinations that led to the imposition of the safeguard measure as well as the measure itself contravened various provisions contained in the Safeguards Agreement and the GATT 1994. In particular, Korea considers that the measure is inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 11 and 12 of the Safeguards Agreement; and Articles I, XIII and XIX of the GATT 1994.

On 16 February 2012, Viet Nam requested consultations with the United States concerning a number of anti-dumping measures on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Viet Nam. In addition to two administrative reviews and the five year “sunset review”, the request for consultations concerns several US laws, regulations, administrative proceedings and practices, including zeroing.

L’Organe d’appel a publié, le 7 mai 2007, son rapport concernant la plainte déposée par l’Argentine contre le Chili dans l’affaire “Chili — Système de fourchettes de prix et mesures de sauvegarde appliqués à certains produits agricoles (Recours de l’Argentine à l’article 21:5 du Mémorandum d’accord sur le règlement des différends)” (WT/DS207/AB/RW).

Le 03 décembre 2001, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “Canada - Mesures visant l’importation de lait et l’exportation de produits laitiers - Recours”.

El 03 de julio de 2002, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Derechos compensatorios sobre determinados productos planos de acero al carbono resistente a la corrosión procedentes de Alemania”.

Le 15 octobre 2004, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “Communautés européennes - Subventions à l’exportation de sucre”.

L’Organe d’appel a publié, le 16 octobre 2008, ses rapports concernant les rapports des groupes spéciaux dans les affaires “Etats-Unis — Maintien de la suspension d’obligations dans le différend CE — Hormones” (DS320) et “Canada — Maintien de la suspension d’obligations dans le différend CE — Hormones” (DS321), respectivement.

On 31 July 2009, China requested consultations with the European Communities concerning Article 9(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96 (the EC's Basic Anti–Dumping Regulation) which provides that in case of imports from non-market economy countries, the duty shall be specified for the supplying country concerned and not for each supplier and that an individual duty will only be specified for exporters that demonstrate that they fulfil the criteria listed in that provision.

Le 31 mars 2000, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Loi antidumping de 1916”.

Le 15 janvier 2015, l’Organe d’appel de l’OMC a remis son rapport sur le différend “Argentine — Mesures affectant les importations de marchandises” (WT/DS438/444/445). Les plaignants dans cette affaire étaient l’Union européenne, les États-Unis et le Japon.

Le 20 novembre 2015, l’Organe d’appel a remis son rapport sur la mise en conformité dans l’affaire États-Unis — Mesures concernant l’importation, la commercialisation et la vente de thon et de produits du thon — Recours à l’article 21:5 du Mémorandum d’accord par le Mexique (DS381).

Le 26 février 2013, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial “Chine — Droits antidumping définitifs visant les appareils à rayons x utilisés pour les inspections de sécurité en provenance de l’Union européenne” (WT/DS425/R).

On 28 March 2017, the WTO issued the panel report in the case brought by China in “European Union - Measures Affecting Tariff Concessions on Certain Poultry Meat Products”.

On 6 October 1998, the EC requested consultations with India concerning certain measures affecting the automotive sector being applied by India. The EC stated that the measures include the documents entitled “Export and Import Policy, 1997-2002”, “ITC (HS Classification) Export and Import Policy 1997-2002” (“Classification”), and “Public Notice No. 60 (PN/97-02) of 12 December 1997, Export and Import Policy April 1997-March 2002”, and any other legislative or administrative provision implemented or consolidated by these policies, as well as MoUs signed by the Indian Government with certain manufacturers of automobiles. The EC contended that: under these measures, imports of complete automobiles and of certain parts and components were subject to a system of non-automatic import licenses. in accordance with Public Notice No. 60, import licenses might be granted only to local joint venture manufacturers that had signed an MoU with the Indian Government, whereby they undertook, inter alia, to comply with certain local content and export balancing requirements. The EC alleged violations of Articles III and XI of GATT 1994, and Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement.

On 10 November 2000, the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of countervailing duties imposed by the US on imports of certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products (“corrosion resistant steel”), dealt with under US case number C-428-817. This dispute related, in particular, to the final results of a full sunset review of the above measure, carried out by the US Department of Commerce (“DOC”) and published in the US Federal Register No. 65 FR 47407 of 2 August 2000. In this decision, the DOC found that revocation of the countervailing duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. The EC considered that this finding is inconsistent with the obligations of the US under the SCM Agreement and, in particular, in breach of Articles 10, 11.9 and 21 (notably 21.3) thereof.

El 30 de agosto de 2017, la OMC hizo públicos los informes del Grupo Especial que se ocupó de los asuntos “Brasil — Determinadas medidas relativas a la tributación y las cargas” planteados por la Unión Europea y el Japón (DS472 y DS497, respectivamente).

On 2 October 2006, the European Communities requested consultations with the United States concerning its continued application of the “zeroing” methodology. In particular, the request for consultations concerns (i) the implementing regulation (19 CFR Section 351) of the US Department of Commerce, especially section 351.414(c)(2); and (ii) the Import Administration Antidumping Manual (1997 edition), including the computer program(s) to which it refers. The European Communities claims that, based on these regulations, the US Department of Commerce continued to apply the “zeroing” methodology in the determinations of the margin of dumping in the final results of the anti-dumping administrative reviews concerning various EC goods, and any assessment instructions issued pursuant to those final results.

On 4 October 1996, the US requested consultations with Argentina concerning the imposition of specific duties on these items in excess of the bound rate and other measures by Argentina. The US contended that these measures violate Articles II, VII, VIII and X of GATT 1994, Article 2 of the TBT Agreement, Article 1 to 8 of the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994, and Article 7 of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing.

El 20 de noviembre de 2015, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Medidas relativas a la importación, comercialización y venta de atún y productos de atún - Recurso”.

On 6 April 1998, Poland requested consultations with Thailand concerning the imposition of final anti-dumping duties on imports of angles, shapes and sections of iron or non-alloy steel and H-beams. Poland asserted that provisional anti-dumping duties were imposed by Thailand on 27 December 1996, and a final anti-dumping duty of 27.78% of CIF value for these products, produced or exported by any Polish producer or exporter, was imposed on 26 May 1997. Poland further asserted that Thailand refused two requests by Poland for disclosure of findings. Poland contended that these actions by Thailand violate Articles 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

El 14 de julio de 2014, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Medidas en materia derechos compensatorios sobre determinados productos procedentes de China”.

El 17 de junio de 2005, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Comunidades Europeas - Medidas compensatorias sobre las microplaquetas para memorias dinámicas de acceso aleatorio procedentes de Corea”.

On 6 May 1999, the US requested consultations with Canada in respect of the term of protection granted to patents that were filed in Canada before 1 October 1989. The US contended that the TRIPS Agreement obligates Members to grant a term of protection for patents that runs at least until twenty years after the filing date of the underlying protection, and requires each Member to grant this minimum term to all patents existing as of the date of the application of the Agreement to that Member. The US alleged that under the Canadian Patent Act, the term granted to patents issued on the basis of applications filed before 1 October 1989 is 17 years from the date on which the patent is issued. The US contended that this situation is inconsistent with Articles 33, 65 and 70 of the TRIPS Agreement.

Le 12 octobre 1998, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “États-Unis - Prohibition à l’importation de certaines crevettes et de certains produits à base de crevettes”.

El 28 de noviembre de 2002, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Estados Unidos - Derechos compensatorios sobre determinados productos planos de acero al carbono resistente a la corrosión procedentes de Alemania”.

Le 21 février 2005, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Enquête en matière de droits compensateurs sur les semi-conducteurs pour mémoires RAM dynamiques (DRAM) en provenance de Corée”.

El 21 de enero de 2000, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Australia - Subvenciones concedidas a los productores y exportadores de cuero para automóviles - Recurso”.

On 27 September 2002, Australia and Brazil requested consultations with the European Communities concerning the export subsidies provided by the EC in the framework of its Common Organisation of the Market for the sugar sector. The requests concerned Council Regulation (EC) No. 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the EC’s common organization of the markets in the sugar sector, and all other legislation, regulations, administrative policies and other instruments relating to the EC regime for sugar and sugar containing products including the rules adopted pursuant to the procedure referred to in Article 42(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1260/2001, and any other provision related thereto. On 14 March 2003, Thailand requested consultations with the European Communities on the same matter.

El 28 de noviembre de 2016 la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo Especial sobre el asunto “Estados Unidos — Incentivos fiscales condicionales para grandes aeronaves civiles” (DS487), planteado por la Unión Europea”

The US appealed on 21 February 1996. On 22 April, the Appellate Body issued its report, modifying the panel report on the interpretation of GATT Article XX(g), but concluding that Article XX(g) was not applicable in this case. The Appellate Report, together with the panel report as modified by the Appellate Report, was adopted by the DSB on 20 May 1996.

On 29 July 2009, the European Communities requested consultations with the Philippines concerning the Philippines' current Excise Tax regime on distilled spirits, which has been in place since 1997. The European Communities contends that the regime discriminates against imported distilled spirits by taxing them at a substantially higher rate than domestic spirits. The European Communities cites a number of specific measures under the regime in its request. The European Communities considers that these measures are inconsistent with the Philippines' obligations under GATT 1994, in particular Article III:2. On 10 August 2009, the United States requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, the Philippines informed the DSB that it had accepted the request of the United States to join the consultations.

El 26 de noviembre de 2003, el Órgano de Apelación hizo público el informe sobre el caso “Japón - Medidas que afectan a la importación de manzanas”.

Le 20 juillet 2015, l’Organe d’appel de l’OMC a remis son rapport dans l’affaire “Pérou — Droit additionnel visant les importations de certains produits agricoles” (DS457) soumise par le Guatemala.

Le 30 novembre 2007, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Mesures visant la fourniture transfrontières de services de jeux et paris - Recours”.

Le 12 avril, l’OMC a distribué le rapport du Groupe spécial chargé d’examiner l’affaire introduite par le Japon “Corée — Droits antidumping visant les valves pneumatiques en provenance du Japon” (DS504).