rpt.gms\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"revenue\" ,r) = X.l(r)*PX.l(r);\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"duty_pmt\",r) = tau(r)*X.l(r)*PX.l(r);\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"revenue\",\"Total_gross_of_duty\") = sum(r,(1+tau(r))*X.l(r)*PX.l(r));\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"share\",r) = (1+tau(r))*X.l(r)*PX.l(r)/(P.l*A.l);\nvchk = P.l*A.l - report(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"revenue\",\"Total_gross_of_duty\");\nAbort$(round(vchk,5)) \"Value check failed: equilibrium=%1\";\nAbort$(round(sum(r,report(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"%1\",\"share\",r)),5) ne 1) \"Report shares do not sum to one\";\n$offecho\n\n* Report the year-prior benchmark (in parameter report)\n$batinclude rpt pybmk\n\nBCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]\n\n*--------------------\n* Equilibrium = pyscn\n* Impose the duties to generate the year-prior counterfactual\n\ntau(\"chn\") = t_ocvd;\n\nPEARM.iterlim=1000;\nSolve PEARM using mcp;\n\n* Report the year-prior counterfactual (in parameter report)\n$batinclude rpt pyscn\n\n*--------------------\n*--------------------\n\n* Equilibrium = rybmk (remedy year hypothetical benchmark)\n* Now recalibrate the model to this solution applied to the 2017 market size\n\nalpha(r)=(1+tau(r))*PX.l(r)*X.l(r)/(P.l*A.l);\nalpha(\"M\")=1-alpha(\"usa\");\nbeta(r)$(not usa(r)) = (1+tau(r))**(sigma_2 - 1) * alpha(r)/sum(r.local$(not usa(r)),alpha(r));\npsi(r)=alpha(r)*a1/(1+tau(r));\nphi = a1;\n\nAbort$(round(sum(r,alpha(r)),7) ne 1) \"Hypothetical 2017 market shares do not sum to one\";\n\n* Set the level values and check the Hypothetical 2017 benchmark 222\nA.l =phi;\nX.l(r) =psi(r);\nP.l =1;\nPX.l(r) =1;\n\nPEARM.iterlim=0;\nSolve PEARM using mcp;\nAbort$(PEARM.objval gt 1e-6) \"Hypothetical 2017 benchmark replication fails\";\n\n* Report the remedy year benchmark\n$batinclude rpt rybmk\n*--------------------\n*--------------------\n* Equilibrium = ryscn\n* Remove the WTO inconsistent duties\n\ntau(\"chn\") = t_cons;\n\nPEARM.iterlim=1000;\nSolve PEARM using mcp;\n\n* Report the remedy year counterfactual\n$batinclude rpt ryscn\n\n* Calculation of NI:\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"ryscn\",\"NI_$M\",\"CHN\")=\nreport(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"ryscn\",\"revenue\",\"CHN\")\n-report(\"%case%\",\"no\",\"rybmk\",\"revenue\",\"CHN\");\n\n*--------------------\ndisplay report;\n\nBCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]\n\nANNEX C-10\nDATA INPUTS USED TO IMPLEMENT THE ARMINGTON MODEL UNDER THE TWO STEPS1,2\n\n1 The code of the software GAMS in Annex C-9 refers to this input table.\n2 The names used in the table refer to the following; 931: Pressure Pipe; 936: Line Pipe; 942: Kitchen\nShelving; 944: OCTG; 946: Wire Strand; 957: Seamless Pipe, 959: Print Graphics; 968: Aluminum Extrusions;\n978: Steel Cylinders; 980: Solar Panels; USA: year-prior sales US domestic variety; CHN: year-prior sales of\nimports from China; ROW: year_prior sales of imports from the RoW; theta: demand elasticity; up: maximum\nvalue of range; lo: minimum value of range; eps_usa: domestic supply elasticity; eps_sub: import supply\nelasticity; eps_chn: supply elasticity of imports from China; eps_row: supply elasticity of imports from RoW;\nsig: elasticity of substitution; MKT2017: total US market value in USD in 2017; tau_ocvd: WTO-inconsistent\nCVD rate; tau_LTAR: LTAR rate; tau_cons: WTO-consistent CVD rate.\nProduct\nUSA\nCHN\nROW\nIMP\nMKT\ntheta_lo\ntheta_up\neps_usa_\nlo\neps_usa_\nup\nsig_lo\nsig_up\neps_sub\neps_chn\neps_row\nMKT2017\ntau_ocvd\ntau_LTAR\ntau_cons\n931\n201,460,000\n154,833,000\n158,535,000\n313,368,000\n514,828,000\n0.3\n0.7\n5\n10\n3\n6\n10\n10\n10\n\n1.1\n0.36\n0.74\n936\n757,701,000\n153,881,000\n315,411,000\n469,292,000\n1,226,993,000\n0.25\n0.5\n3\n5\n2\n4\n10\n10\n10\n\n36.35\n32.49\n3.86\n942\n84,256,000\n150,477,000\n276,171,000\n426,648,000\n510,904,000\n0.1\n0.5\n5\n10\n4\n6\n10\n10\n10\n\n13.3\n11.76\n1.54\n944\n6,184,818,000\n2,805,206,000\n2,572,888,000\n5,378,094,000\n11,562,912,000\n0.75\n1\n4\n6\n3\n5\n10\n10\n10\n6,356,019,000\n12.26\n10.19\n2.07\n946\n333,721,000\n194,276,000\n21,771,000\n216,047,000\n549,768,000\n0.5\n1\n3\n5\n2\n4\n10\n10\n10\n\n27.64\n10.95\n16.69\n957\n199,357,000\n135,240,000\n348,609,000\n483,849,000\n683,206,000\n0.5\n1\n5\n10\n2\n4\n10\n10\n10\n\n28.9\n3.64\n25.26\n\nBCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]\n\nProduct\nUSA\nCHN\nROW\nIMP\nMKT\ntheta_lo\ntheta_up\neps_usa_lo\neps_usa_up\nsig_lo\nsig_up\neps_sub\neps_chn\neps_row\nMKT2017\ntau_ocvd\ntau_LTAR\ntau_cons\n959\n1,023,688,000\n297,527,000\n420,989,000\n718,516,000\n1,742,204,000\n0.75\n1.25\n3\n5\n2\n4\n10\n10\n10\n\n19.46\n0.8\n18.66\n968\n2,888,945,000\n547,968,000\n359,382,000\n907,350,000\n3,796,295,000\n0.25\n0.5\n3\n5\n4\n6\n10\n10\n10\n\n7.37\n3.8\n3.57\n978\n\n23,009,000\n2,821,000\n25,830,000\n41,967,000\n0.25\n0.75\n5\n10\n3\n5\n10\n10\n10\n\n15.81\n14.34\n1.47\n980\n804,853,000\n1,905,220,000\n824,588,000\n2,729,808,000\n3,534,661,000\n0.75\n1\n4\n7\n3\n5\n10\n10\n10\n4,055,230,000\n15.24\n0.715\n14.62\n\nBCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]\n\nANNEX C-11\nRESULTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE FIRST STEP OF THE TWO-STEP ARMINGTON MODEL1\n\nProduct Simulated market share of\nUS domestic producers\nSimulated market share of\nChinese exporters\nSimulated market share of\nexporters from the rest of\nthe world\n\nWTO-\ninconsistent\nCVD rate\nWTO-\nconsistent\nCVD rate\nWTO-\ninconsistent\nCVD rate\nWTO-\nconsistent\nCVD rate\nWTO-\ninconsistent\nCVD rate\nWTO-\nconsistent\nCVD rate\nPressure\nPipe 0.394 0.393 0.294 0.296 0.312 0.311\nLine Pipe 0.643 0.621 0.069 0.117 0.287 0.261\nKitchen\nShelving 0.178 0.167 0.213 0.284 0.609 0.550\nOCTG 0.562 0.540 0.191 0.233 0.247 0.227\nWire\nStrand 0.677 0.652 0.271 0.300 0.053 0.048\nSeamless\nPipe 0.310 0.308 0.123 0.130 0.567 0.561\nPrint\nGraphics 0.610 0.609 0.125 0.126 0.265 0.264\nAluminum\nExtrusions 0.779 0.770 0.120 0.132 0.101 0.098\nSteel\nCylinders [[***]] [[***]] [[***]] [[***]] [[***]] [[***]]\nSolar\nPanels 0.260 0.259 0.446 0.449 0.294 0.292"},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:41.253978"}}},{"rowIdx":7189,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"437"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"437"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS437_SEQ08_Recourse.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS437_SEQ08_Recourse.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":8,"string":"8"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Recourse"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"RECOURSE"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"null"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"28 October 2019"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS437/31"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['China']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['U.S.']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Implementation & Compliance"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 26 January 2022\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by China.\nOn 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on certain products from China.\nChina challenges various aspects of certain identified countervailing duty investigations, including their opening, conduct and the preliminary and final determinations that led to the imposition of countervailing duties. China also challenges the “rebuttable presumption” allegedly established and applied by the US Department of Commerce that majority government ownership is sufficient to treat an enterprise as a “public body”.\nChina claims that the challenge measures are inconsistent with:\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nOn 20 August 2012, China requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 31 August 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\nAt its meeting on 28 September 2012, the DSB established a panel. Australia, Brazil, Canada, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, the Russian Federation, Turkey and Viet Nam reserved their third party rights. Subsequently, Saudi Arabia reserved its third party rights.\nOn 14 November 2012, China requested the Director-General to determine the composition of the panel. On 26 November 2012, the Director-General composed the panel. On 29 April 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that the timetable adopted by the panel after consultations with the parties envisaged that the final report would be issued to the parties by January 2014. On 18 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that due to the complexity of the issues raised by the parties in this dispute, the panel expected to conclude its work in May 2014.\nOn 14 July 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 22 August 2014, China filed an appeal covering most of the issues on which the Panel did not rule in its favour. On 27 August 2014, the United States filed a cross-appeal of the Panel's preliminary determination relating to the consistency of one section of China's panel request with Article 6.2 of the DSU. The United States did not appeal the Panel's finding that the USDOC's application of a “rebuttable presumption” to determine whether certain entities can be characterized as “public bodies” was inconsistent “as such” with Article 1.1(a)(1) of the SCM Agreement. Nor did the United States challenge on appeal the Panel's finding that the “public body” determinations made by the USDOC in 14 countervailing duty investigations were inconsistent with the same provision, or the Panel's findings regarding the USDOC's treatment of certain export restraints in two of the investigations at issue.\nOn 18 December 2014, the Appellate Body report was circulated to Members.\nAt its meeting on 16 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nOn 13 February 2015, the United States informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 26 June 2015, China requested that the reasonable period of time be determined through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. On 9 July 2015, China requested the Director-General to appoint the arbitrator. On 17 July 2015, the Director-General appointed Mr Georges M. Abi-Saab to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. On 22 July 2015, Mr Abi-Saab accepted this appointment.\nOn 9 October 2015, the Award of the Arbitrator was circulated to Members. The Arbitrator determined the reasonable period of time as 14 months, 16 days. The reasonable period of time will thus expire on 1 April 2016.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 15 April 2016, China and the United States informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU.\n\nCompliance proceedings\nOn 13 May 2016, China requested consultations pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, in connection with the United States' alleged failure to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute. On 8 July 2016, China requested, pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, the establishment of a compliance panel. At its meeting on 21 July 2016, the DSB agreed to refer to the original panel, if possible, the matter raised by China. Australia, Canada, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, the Russian Federation, and Viet Nam reserved their third party rights. On 26 September 2016, China requested the Director-General to determine the composition of the panel because two of the original panelists were not available to serve in the compliance panel proceedings. On 5 October 2016, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2016, the Chairperson of the compliance panel informed the DSB that the compliance panel expected to issue its final report to the parties in the second half of 2017.\nOn 21 March 2018, the Compliance panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 27 April 2018, the United States notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in the compliance panel report and certain legal interpretations developed by the compliance panel. On 2 May 2018, China notified the DSB of its decision to cross-appeal.\nAlthough the appeal in this dispute was initiated in April 2018, work on this appeal could gather pace only in October 2018. On 2 July 2019, the Chair of the Appellate Body notified the Chair of the DSB that the Appellate Body Report in these proceedings would be circulated to WTO Members on 16 July 2019. In an earlier communication, the Chair of the Appellate Body had explained that this was due to a number of factors, including the backlog of appeals pending with the Appellate Body at present and the overlap in the composition of all divisions resulting in part from the reduced number of Appellate Body Members.\nOn 16 July 2019, the Appellate Body report was circulated to Members.\nAt its meeting on 15 August 2019, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as upheld by the Appellate Body report.\n\nProceedings under Article 22 of the DSU (remedies)"},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES\nON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA\nRECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES\nThe following communication, dated 25 October 2019, from the delegation of the United States to\nthe Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 22.6 of the DSU.\n\nRegarding China's recourse to Article 22.2 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing\nthe Settlement of Disputes (\"DSU\") in the dispute United States – Countervailing Duty Measures on\nCertain Products from China (WT/DS437), my authorities have instructed me to inform you that,\npursuant to Article 22.6 of the DSU, the United States objects to the level of suspension of\nconcessions and related obligations \"with respect to goods under the agreements described in\nArticle 22.3(g)(i) of the DSU\" proposed by China in document\n\nAccordingly, as required by Article 22.6 of the DSU2, the matter has been referred to arbitration.\n\nAccordingly, any proposed suspension of concessions or obligations in another sector or under another\nagreement would not follow the principles and procedures set forth in Article 22.3 of the DSU.\n2 Pursuant to Article 22.6 of the DSU, \"if the Member concerned objects to the level of suspension\nproposed, … the matter shall be referred to arbitration\"."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:41.254582"}}},{"rowIdx":7190,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"437"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"437"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS437_SEQ09_Request_For_Arbitration.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS437_SEQ09_Request_For_Arbitration.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":9,"string":"9"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Request_For_Arbitration"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"REQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"ARBITRATION"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"null"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA REQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"30 June 2015"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS437/14"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['China']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['U.S.']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Implementation & Compliance"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 26 January 2022\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by China.\nOn 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on certain products from China.\nChina challenges various aspects of certain identified countervailing duty investigations, including their opening, conduct and the preliminary and final determinations that led to the imposition of countervailing duties. China also challenges the “rebuttable presumption” allegedly established and applied by the US Department of Commerce that majority government ownership is sufficient to treat an enterprise as a “public body”.\nChina claims that the challenge measures are inconsistent with:\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nOn 20 August 2012, China requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 31 August 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\nAt its meeting on 28 September 2012, the DSB established a panel. Australia, Brazil, Canada, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, the Russian Federation, Turkey and Viet Nam reserved their third party rights. Subsequently, Saudi Arabia reserved its third party rights.\nOn 14 November 2012, China requested the Director-General to determine the composition of the panel. On 26 November 2012, the Director-General composed the panel. On 29 April 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that the timetable adopted by the panel after consultations with the parties envisaged that the final report would be issued to the parties by January 2014. On 18 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that due to the complexity of the issues raised by the parties in this dispute, the panel expected to conclude its work in May 2014.\nOn 14 July 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 22 August 2014, China filed an appeal covering most of the issues on which the Panel did not rule in its favour. On 27 August 2014, the United States filed a cross-appeal of the Panel's preliminary determination relating to the consistency of one section of China's panel request with Article 6.2 of the DSU. The United States did not appeal the Panel's finding that the USDOC's application of a “rebuttable presumption” to determine whether certain entities can be characterized as “public bodies” was inconsistent “as such” with Article 1.1(a)(1) of the SCM Agreement. Nor did the United States challenge on appeal the Panel's finding that the “public body” determinations made by the USDOC in 14 countervailing duty investigations were inconsistent with the same provision, or the Panel's findings regarding the USDOC's treatment of certain export restraints in two of the investigations at issue.\nOn 18 December 2014, the Appellate Body report was circulated to Members.\nAt its meeting on 16 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nOn 13 February 2015, the United States informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 26 June 2015, China requested that the reasonable period of time be determined through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. On 9 July 2015, China requested the Director-General to appoint the arbitrator. On 17 July 2015, the Director-General appointed Mr Georges M. Abi-Saab to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. On 22 July 2015, Mr Abi-Saab accepted this appointment.\nOn 9 October 2015, the Award of the Arbitrator was circulated to Members. The Arbitrator determined the reasonable period of time as 14 months, 16 days. The reasonable period of time will thus expire on 1 April 2016.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 15 April 2016, China and the United States informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU.\n\nCompliance proceedings\nOn 13 May 2016, China requested consultations pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, in connection with the United States' alleged failure to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute. On 8 July 2016, China requested, pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, the establishment of a compliance panel. At its meeting on 21 July 2016, the DSB agreed to refer to the original panel, if possible, the matter raised by China. Australia, Canada, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, the Russian Federation, and Viet Nam reserved their third party rights. On 26 September 2016, China requested the Director-General to determine the composition of the panel because two of the original panelists were not available to serve in the compliance panel proceedings. On 5 October 2016, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2016, the Chairperson of the compliance panel informed the DSB that the compliance panel expected to issue its final report to the parties in the second half of 2017.\nOn 21 March 2018, the Compliance panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 27 April 2018, the United States notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in the compliance panel report and certain legal interpretations developed by the compliance panel. On 2 May 2018, China notified the DSB of its decision to cross-appeal.\nAlthough the appeal in this dispute was initiated in April 2018, work on this appeal could gather pace only in October 2018. On 2 July 2019, the Chair of the Appellate Body notified the Chair of the DSB that the Appellate Body Report in these proceedings would be circulated to WTO Members on 16 July 2019. In an earlier communication, the Chair of the Appellate Body had explained that this was due to a number of factors, including the backlog of appeals pending with the Appellate Body at present and the overlap in the composition of all divisions resulting in part from the reduced number of Appellate Body Members.\nOn 16 July 2019, the Appellate Body report was circulated to Members.\nAt its meeting on 15 August 2019, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as upheld by the Appellate Body report.\n\nProceedings under Article 22 of the DSU (remedies)"},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON\nCERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA\nREQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU\nThe following communication, dated 26 June 2015, from the delegation of China to the\nChairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.\n\nOn 16 January 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body (\"DSB\") adopted its recommendations and\nrulings in the dispute United States – Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products from\nChina. On 13 February 2015, the United States announced its intention to implement the DSB's\nrecommendations and rulings in this dispute and stated that it would need a reasonable period of\ntime in which to do so.\n\nPursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understa nding on Rules and Procedures Governing the\nSettlement of Disputes (\"DSU\"), China has held consultations with the United States regarding the\nlength of the reasonable period of time. Howeve r, the parties have not been able to reach an\nagreement. As a result, China requests that the reasonable period of time be determined through\nbinding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.\n\nChina is ready to enter into consultations with the United States on the appointment of the\narbitrator within the next ten days, pursuant to footnote 12 of the DSU.\n\nWe respectfully request that you circulate this notification to the Members of the DSB."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:41.255168"}}},{"rowIdx":7191,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Request_For_Consultations"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"Request for Consultations by the European Union"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"30 May 2012"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/1; G/L/989; G/AG/GEN/101; G/LIC/D/40; G/TRIMS/D/29; G/SG/D42/1"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":"Agriculture (AG); General Council; Import Licensing (LIC); Safeguards (SG); Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMS)"},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":4,"string":"4"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION\nOF GOODS\n\nRequest for Consultations by the European Union\n\n The following communication, dated 25 May 2012, from the delegation of the\nEuropean Union to the delegation of Argentina an d to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement\nBody, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.\n\nMy authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of the\nRepublic of Argentina (\"Argentina\"), pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and\nProcedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes , Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs\nand Trade, 1994 (GATT 1994), Article 19 of the Agreement on Agriculture , Article 6 of the\nAgreement on Import Licensing Procedures and (the ILP Agreement) Article 8 of the Agreement on\nTrade Related Investment Measures (the TRIMS Agreement) and Article 14 of the Agreement on\nSafeguards, with respect to certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods into\nArgentina.\nArgentina subjects the importation of goods into Argentina to the presentation for approval\n(validación) of a so-called Declaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación (DJAI). The relevant legal\ninstruments are listed in Annex I.\nArgentina subjects the importation of certain goods into Argentina to various types of\nlicenses: Licencias No Automáticas de Importación in the form of Certificados de Importación (CIs);\nLicencias Automáticas Previas de Importación ( LAPI); and Certificados de Libre Circulación\n(CLCs). The legal instruments providing for these measures are listed in Annex II, Annex III and\nAnnex IV, respectively.\nArgentina often requires the importers of goods to undertake certain commitments, including,\ninter alia, to limit their imports, to balance them with exports, to make or increase their investments in\nproduction facilities in Argentina, to increase the lo cal content of the products they manufacture in\nArgentina, not to transfer benefits abroad and/or to control their prices.\nThe issuance of LAPIs, CIs and CLCs and the approval of DJAIs is being systematically\ndelayed or refused by the Argentinean authorities on non-transparent grounds. Often the Argentinean\nauthorities make the issuance of LAPIs, CIs and CLC and the approval of DJIAs conditional upon the\nimporters undertaking to comply with the trade restrictive commitments mentioned above.\nWT/DS438/1, G/L/989,\nG/AG/GEN/101, G/LIC/D/40,\nG/TRIMS/D/29, G/SG/D42/1\n\nThese measures restrict imports of goods and discriminate between imported and domestic\ngoods. They do not appear to be related to the implementation of any measure justified under the\nWTO Agreement, but instead aimed at advancing th e Argentinean Government's stated policies of\nre-industrialization, import substitution and elimination of trade balance deficits.\nThe legal measures through which Argentina impos es these restrictions include, but are not\nlimited to, the legal instruments listed in the A nnexes, as well as any amendments, replacements,\nextensions, implementing measures or related measures.\nArgentina's measures appear to be inconsis tent with Argentina's obligations under the\nfollowing provisions of the covered agreements:\n(i) Articles III:4, VIII; X:1, X:3 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994;\n(ii) Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement;\n(iii) Articles 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 2.2, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 of the ILP Agreement.\n(iv) Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture;\n(v) Article 11 of the Safeguards Agreement.\nArgentina's measures appear to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to the European Union\ndirectly or indirectly under the covered agreements.\nThe European Union reserves the right to ra ise additional measures and claims regarding\nthese matters in the course of the consultations.\nThe European Union looks forward to receiving in due course a reply from Argentina to this\nrequest. The European Union is ready to consider with Argentina mutually convenient dates to hold\nconsultations.\n\nWT/DS438/1, G/L/989,\n G/AG/GEN/101, G/LIC/D/40,\n G/TRIMS/D/29, G/SG/D42/1\n\nAnnex I\nDeclaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación\n(DJAI)\n– Resolución AFIP 3252/2012\n– Resolución AFIP 3255/2012\n– Resolución AFIP 3256/2012\n– Resolución AFIP 3276/2012\n– Resolución SCI 1/2012\n– Comunicación del Banco Central “A” 5134 of 1.11.2010\n– Any amendments, replacements, extensions, implementing measures or related measures.\n\nAnnex II\nNon-automatic licenses (Licencias No Automáticas de Importación) in the form of import\ncertificates (Certificados de Importacion)\n– Import certificate for shoes ( productos del sector calzado ) - C.I.C.: Resolución MEyOSP 977/99,\nResolución SICM 736/99 and Resolución MEyP 486/2005\n– Import certificate for paper ( papel) – C.I.P.: Resolución MEyOSP 1117/99 and Resolución\nSICyM 798/99\n– Import certificate for household products ( artículos para el hogar ) - C.I.A.H.: Resolución MEyP\n444/2004 and Resolución SICPME 177/2004;\n– Import certificate for toys (juguetes) – C.I.J.: Resolución MEyP 485/2005\n– Import certificate for motorcycles (motocicletas) – C.I.M. : Resolución MEyP 689/2006,\n– Import Certificate for bicycle tyres ( cubiertas y neumáticos de bicicleta ): - C.I.C.C.N.B. :\nResolución MEyP 694/2006\n– Import certificate for miscella neous manufactured products ( manufacturas diversas ) – C.I.M.D.:\nResolución MEyP 47/2007\n– Import certificate for shoe parts (partes de calzado) – C.I.P.C.: Resolución MEyP 61/2007\n– Import certificate for balls (pelotas) C.I.P.: Resolución MEyP 217/2007\n– Import certificate for textile products (productos textiles) – C.I.P.T. : Resolución MEyP 343/2007\n– Import certificate for metal products ( productos metalúrgicos ) – C.I.P.M: Resolución MEyP\n588/2008\n– Import certificate for yarns (hilados y tejidos) – C.I.H.T.: Resolución MEyP 589/2008\n– Import certificate for tyres (neumáticos) – C.I.N: Resolución MP 26/2009\n– Import certificate for miscellaneous products ( productos varios ) – C.I.P.V.: Resolución MP\n61/2009\nWT/DS438/1, G/L/989,\nG/AG/GEN/101, G/LIC/D/40,\nG/TRIMS/D/29, G/SG/D42/1\n\n– Import certificate for screws and similar products ( tornillos y afines ) – C.I.T.A.: Resolución MP\n165/2009\n– Import certificate for autorparts (autopartes y afines) – C.I.A.P.A.: Resolución MP 337/2009\n– Import certificate for motor vehicles (vehículos automóviles) – C.I.V.A.: Resolución MI 45/2011\n– Any amendments, replacements, extensions, implementing measures or related measures.\n\nAnnex III\nAutomatic import licenses\n(Licencias Automáticas Previas de Importación or LAPI)\n– Resolución MEyOSP 17/99\n– Resolución SICM 59/99\n– Resolución SICM 150/99\n– Resolución MEyOSP 820/99\n– Resolución SICM 465/99 y AFIP 451/99\n– Decreto PEN 509/2007\n– Any amendments, replacements, extensions, implementing measures or related measures.\n\nAnnex IV\nCertificados de Libre Importación for food products\n– Ley 1824/1969\n– Decreto 2092/1991\n– Resolución M.S y A.S. 876/97\n– Resolución ANMATM 5434/98.\n– Any amendments, replacements, extensions, implementing measures or related measures."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.436511"}}},{"rowIdx":7192,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ02_Communication_00.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ02_Communication_00.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":2,"string":"2"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Communication"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"COMMUNICATION FROM"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":0,"string":"0"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"7 May 2014"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/14; WT/DS444/13; WT/DS445/13"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL\nThe following communication, dated 5 May 2014, was received from the Chairperson of the Panel\nwith the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body.\n\nArticle 12.8 of the Understanding on Rules and Pr ocedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes\n(DSU) provides that the period in which a panel shall conduct its examination, from the date that\nthe composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed upon until the date the final\nreport is issued to the parties to the dispute, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.\n\nArticle 12.9 of the DSU provides that, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report within\nsix months, it shall inform the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in writing accordingly and indicate\nthe reasons, together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.\n\nThe Panel on Argentina – Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods (WT/DS438, WT/DS444,\nWT/DS445) was established by the DSB on 28 January 2013 and composed on 27 May 2013. In its\ncommunication to the DSB of 15 November 2013 (, , ),\nthe Panel indicated that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014.\nHowever, it will not be possible for the Panel to issue its final report to the parties by that time,\ndue to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence.\n\nThe Panel estimates that it will issue its final re port to the parties by the end of June 2014, in\naccordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.437139"}}},{"rowIdx":7193,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ03_Working_Procedures_00.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ03_Working_Procedures_00.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":3,"string":"3"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Working_Procedures"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":0,"string":"0"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY ARGENTINA UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"29 September 2014"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/15; WT/DS444/14; WT/DS445/14"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":3,"string":"3"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nNOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY ARGENTINA\nUNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES\nAND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),\nAND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW\n The following notification, dated 26 September 2014, from the Delegation of Argentina, is\nbeing circulated to Members.\n\nArgentina – Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods () (\"Panel Report\").\n2. The measures at issue are the Declaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación (\"DJAI\") and\nthe alleged \"Trade-Related Requirements\" (\"TRRs\") measure.\n3. The issues that Argentina raises in this appeal relate to the Panel's findings and conclusions\nin respect of the Panel's terms of reference under the DSU, as well as the Panel's findings and\nconclusions with respect to the consistency of the challenged measures with various provisions of\nthe General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (\"GATT 1994\").\n4. Pursuant to Rules 20(1) and 21(1) of the Working Procedures, Argentina files this Notice of\nAppeal together with its Appellant's Submission with the Appellate Body Secretariat.\n5. Pursuant to Rule 20(2)(d)(iii) of the Working Pr ocedures, this Notice of Appeal provides an\nindicative list of the paragraphs of the Panel Repo rt containing the alleged errors of law and legal\ninterpretation by the Panel, without prejudice to Ar gentina's ability to rely on other paragraphs of\nthe Panel Report in its appeal.\nI. REVIEW OF THE PANEL'S FINDINGS REGARDING THE PANEL'S TERMS OF\nREFERENCE\n6. Argentina seeks review by the Appellate Body of the Panel's finding that the alleged \"TRRs\"\nmeasure was within its terms of reference. The Panel's errors of law and legal interpretation\ninclude:\n The Panel erred by relying on its prior \"conclusion\" that the alleged \"TRRs\" measure was\n\"explicitly identified as a measure at issue\" in the complainants' consultations requests;\n1\n\nWT/DS438/15 • WT/DS444/14 • WT/DS445/14\n\n The Panel erred by failing to consider Argentina's argument that the complainants'\nintroduction in their panel requests of \"as such\" or equally broad claims with respect to\nthe alleged \"TRRs\" measure impermissibly expanded the scope of the dispute.\n2\n7. For these reasons, Argentina requests that the Appellate Body reverse the Panel's conclusion\nin paragraph 4.1(b) of the Preliminary Ruling by the Panel (16 September 2013), in which the\nPanel concluded that \"[t]he characterization of the RTRRs as a single 'overarching measure' in the\ncomplainants' panel requests does not expand th e scope or change the essence of the dispute.\"\n3\nArgentina requests that the Appellate Body also reverse the Panel's ultimate conclusions to this\neffect in paragraphs 7.1(b), 7.5(b), and 7.9(b) of the Panel Report.\n8. Argentina requests that the Appellate Body find, instead, that the complainants' introduction\nof the alleged \"TRRs\" measure in their panel requests did expand the scope or change the essence\nof the dispute, and that the alleged measure was therefore outside of the Panel's terms of\nreference.\nII. REVIEW OF THE PANEL'S FINDINGS UN DER ARTICLES III:4 AND XI:1 OF THE\nGATT 1994 AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE ALLEGED \"TRRS\" MEASURE\n9. Argentina seeks review by the Appellate Body of the Panel's findings that the alleged \"TRRs\"\nmeasure is inconsistent with Articles III:4 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994, as well as the Panel's\nseparate findings that the alleged \"TRRs\" measure is inconsistent \"as such\" with Articles XI:1 and\nIII:4 of the GATT 1994. The Panel's errors of law and legal interpretation include:\n The Panel erred in failing to apply the correct legal standard to ascertain the existence of\nthe alleged \"TRRs measure\";4\n The Panel acted inconsistently with its duty under Article 11 of the DSU to conduct an\nobjective assessment of the matter when assessing Japan's \"as such\" claims against the\nalleged \"TRRs measure\".\n5\n10. Argentina therefore respectfully requests that the Appellate Body reverse the Panel's finding\nthat the complainants had established that the alleged \"TRRs measure\" existed or \"operate[d] as a\nsingle measure\",6 as well as the Panel's findings that the alleged measure was inconsistent with\nArticles XI:1 and III:4 of the GATT 1994. 7 Accordingly, Argentina respectfully requests that the\nAppellate Body reverse the Panel's ultimate conclusions to this effect in paragraphs 7.1(d)-(f),\n7.5(c)-(d), and 7.9(d)-(f) of the Panel Report.\n11. Argentina also respectfully requests that the Appellate Body reverse the Panel's ultimate\nconclusion in paragraph 7.9(h) that the alleged \"TRRs measure\" is \"as such\" inconsistent with\nArticles XI:1 and III:4 of the GATT 1994.\nIII. REVIEW OF THE PANEL'S FINDINGS UN DER ARTICLES VIII AND XI OF THE\nGATT 1994 AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE DJAI\n12. Argentina seeks review by the Appellate Body certain limited aspects of the Panel's findings\nand conclusions in respect the interpretation and application of Articles VIII and XI:1 of the\nGATT 1994 as they pertain to the DJAI. The Panel's errors of law and legal interpretation include:\n The Panel erred in its assessment of the scope of Article VIII, and in particular in its\nimplication that Article VIII does not encompass import procedures that are a \"necessary\npre-requisite for importing goods\";\n8\n\n2 Panel Report, Annex D.1, paras. 3.29-3.33.\n3 Panel Report, Annex D.1, para. 4.1(b).\n4 Panel Report, paras. 6.138-6.231.\n5 Panel Report, paras. 6.315-6.343.\n6 Panel Report, para. 6.231.\n7 Panel Report, paras. 6.265, 6.295, 6.343.\n8 Panel Report, paras. 6.425-6.444.\nWT/DS438/15 • WT/DS444/14 • WT/DS445/14\n\n The Panel erred in not establishing and applying a proper analytical framework for\ndistinguishing between the scope and disciplines of Article VIII, on the one hand, and the\nscope and disciplines of Article XI:1, on the other;\n9 and,\n The Panel erred in its conclusion that the DJAI procedure is inconsistent with Article XI:1\nbased on its finding that the approval of a DJAI application is not \"automatic\".10\n13. For these reasons, Argentina requests that the Appellate Body modify or reverse the Panel's\nfindings in paragraph 6.433 of the Panel Report implying that any import procedure that is a\n\"necessary pre-requisite for importing goods\" or by which a Member \"determines the right to\nimport\" to be outside the scope of Article VIII.\n14. Argentina respectfully requests the Appellate Body to modify the Panel's reasoning in\nparagraphs 6.435 to 6.445 of the Panel Report and to find that, to the extent that import\nformalities and requirements can be examined under Article XI:1 at all, a finding of inconsistency\nwould require the complaining Member to prove that: (1) the formality or requirement at issue\nlimits the quantity or amount of imports to a ma terial degree that is separate and independent of\nthe trade-restricting effect of any substantive rule of importation that the formality or requirement\nimplements; and (2) this separate and independent trade-restricting effect is greater than the\neffect that would ordinarily be associated with a formality or requirement of its nature.\n15. Argentina respectfully requests the Appellate Body to reverse the Panel's finding in\nparagraph 6.474 of the Panel Report that the DJAI procedure is inconsistent with Article XI:1 of\nthe GATT 1994 on the grounds that the attainment of a DJAI in exit status is not \"automatic\".\nArgentina also requests that the Appellate Body reverse the Panel's ultimate conclusion that the\nDJAI procedure is inconsistent with Article XI:1, as set forth in paragraphs 6.479, 7.2(a), 7.6(a)\nand 7.10(a) of the Panel Report."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.439113"}}},{"rowIdx":7194,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ04_Working_Procedures_01.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ04_Working_Procedures_01.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":4,"string":"4"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Working_Procedures"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"2 October 2014"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/16"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nNOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION\nUNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES\nAND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),\nAND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW\nThe following notification, dated 1 October 2014, fr om the Delegation of the European Union, is\nbeing circulated to Members.\n\nGoverning the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) and Rule 23 of the Working Procedures for Appellate\nReview, the European Union hereby notifies its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain\nissues of law and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel in Argentina – Measures\nAffecting the Importation of Goods () (Panel Report).\n2. The European Union submits that the Panel made an error in applying Article 6.2 of the DSU\nwhen determining its terms of reference in this case. Specifically, The European Union submits\nthat the Panel erred when finding that the 23 measures described by the European Union in\nSection 4.2.4 of its first written submission as \"s pecific instances\" of application of alleged RTRRs\nwere not precisely identified in the EU's Panel Request as measures at issue and that, accordingly,\nthose 23 measures did not constitute \"measures at issue\" in the present dispute.\n1 Those measures\nwere clearly identified on substance in the EU's Panel Request in accordance with the requirements\nunder Article 6.2 of the DSU. Thus, they were \"measures at issue\" in this dispute and the Panel\nshould have examined them accordingly.\n3. Moreover, as a conditional appeal, should the Appellate Body agree with Argentina's appeal\nin this case and, thus, reverse or otherwise modify any of the Panel's findings that the TTR\nmeasure exists and that was inconsistent with Articles XI:1 and III:4 of the GATT 1994, the\nEuropean Union requests the Appellate Body to complete the analysis and find that Argentina\nviolated Articles XI:1 and/or III:4 of the GATT 1994 in each of the 23 specific measures described\nby the European Union in Section 4.2.4 of its first written submission."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.440025"}}},{"rowIdx":7195,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":5,"string":"5"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Communication"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"COMMUNICATION FROM"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"24 November 2014"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/17; WT/DS444/15; WT/DS445/16"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY\n The following notification, dated 20 November 2014, from the Chair of the Appellate Body\naddressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance\nwith Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rule s and Procedures Governing the Settlement of\nDisputes.\n\nI am writing to you pursuant to Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures\nGoverning the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), wh ich stipulates that, as a general rule, the\nAppellate Body will circulate its report no later than 60 days after the appellant has formally\nnotified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of its decision to appeal. Article 17.5 states,\nfurthermore, that when the Appellate Body considers that it cannot provide its report within\n60 days, it shall inform the DSB in writing of the reasons for the delay together with an estimate of\nthe period within which it will submit its report.\n\nArgentina notified the DSB on 26 September 2014 of its decision to appeal certain issues of law\ncovered in the Panel Reports and legal interpretations developed by the Panel in these disputes,\nwith the result that the 60-day period expires on Tuesday, 25 November 2014. For the reasons\nexpressed below, the Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its report by this date, or within the\n90-day timeframe provided for in the last sentence of Article 17.5 of the DSU.\n\nAt the time the Division hearing this appeal was composed, the Appellate Body comprised only six,\nrather than the full complement of seven, Appellate Body Members. The Appellate Body has also\nfaced a substantial workload in the second half of 2014, with several appeals proceeding in\nparallel, and there has been overlap in the composition of the Divisions hearing these different\nappeals during this period. Moreover, the 90-day pe riod in these disputes will expire during the\nannual year-end closure of the WTO Secretariat.\n\nDue to the scheduling issues arising from these circumstances, the number and complexity of the\nissues raised in these and concurrent appeal proc eedings and the demands that this places on the\nWTO Secretariat's translation services, as well as the intervening closure of the WTO Secretariat for\nthe 2014 year-end period, the Appellate Body will not be able to circulate its report within the\n90-day timeframe provided for in Article 17.5 of the DSU.\n\nFor these reasons, we estimate that the Appellate Bo dy report in this appeal will be circulated to\nWTO Members no later than Thursday, 15 January 2015."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.440784"}}},{"rowIdx":7196,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ06_Communication_02.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ06_Communication_02.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":6,"string":"6"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Communication"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"COMMUNICATION FROM"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":2,"string":"2"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"11 December 2014"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/18; WT/DS444/17; WT/DS445/18"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION\nThe following communication, dated 9 December 2014, from the delegation of the European Union\nto the Presiding Member of the Appellate Body Division in this dispute, is circulated at the request\nof this delegation.\n\nThe European Union refers to a letter dated 5 December 2014 from three participants in these\nproceedings i.e. the responding party Argentina and two of the complaining parties United States\nand Japan (\"the three participants\"). In this letter the three participants appear to interpret\nArticle 17.5 of the Understanding on the Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of\nDisputes (DSU) in a manner that necessitates a reaction from the European Union. In particular,\nthe letter appears to suggest that the Appellate Body would be required to consult and obtain the\nagreement of the participants if it cannot issue its report within the 90-day time limit set out in\nArticle 17.5 of the DSU. However, the three partic ipants fail to cite any legal basis in the DSU,\ntextual or otherwise, that would require such consultation and agreement. For its part, the\nEuropean Union would like to state for the record its view that such a basis does not exist and that\ntherefore the interpretation provided by the three participants is plainly incorrect.\nFurthermore, the three participants assert the ex istence and normative significance of a \"prior\npractice of Members\" citing inter alia certain cases to which the European Union has been a main\nparty/participant. In particular, the letter asserts that a practice existed until 2011 according to\nwhich \"the Appellate Body consulted with the Parties and obtained their agreement before\ncirculating reports after the deadline provided for in the DSU\". Furthermore, it appears that for the\nthree participants the asserted past practice carries some normative relevance. The\nEuropean Union would like to state for the record that it disagrees with the assertion made by the\nthree participants on the existence of such past practice and its normative value. At most, the\ncitations provided in the letter demonstrate that each of the participants agreed that a certain\nfactual situation existed or certain events factually took place in the context of the relevant\nproceedings without those circumstances and/or the purported \"agreement\" having any normative\nrelevance."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.441492"}}},{"rowIdx":7197,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ07_Communication_03.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ07_Communication_03.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":7,"string":"7"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Communication"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"COMMUNICATION FROM"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":3,"string":"3"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"19 January 2015"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/19; WT/DS444/19; WT/DS445/20; WT/DS438/AB/R; WT/DS444/AB/R; WT/DS445/AB/R."},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY\n The following notification, dated 15 January 2015, from the Chair of the Appellate Body\naddressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance\nwith Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rule s and Procedures Governing the Settlement of\nDisputes.\n\nI t i s m y h o n o u r t o p r o v i d e t o y o u the Reports of the Appellate Body in Argentina – Measures\nAffecting the Importation of Goods , / / These\nReports will be circulated to Members of the at approximately 4 p.m.\ntoday, in accordance with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing\nthe Settlement of Disputes. These Reports are co nfidential until their circulation. The three\nMembers of the Appellate Body who served on these appeals were Mr Seung Wha Chang, as\nPresiding Member, and Mr Ujal Bhatia and Mr Ricardo Ramírez-Hernández, as Members."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.441814"}}},{"rowIdx":7198,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ08_Communication_04.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ08_Communication_04.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":8,"string":"8"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Communication"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"COMMUNICATION FROM"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"number","value":4,"string":"4"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"13 March 2015"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/21"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nCOMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING\nARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU\nThe following communication, dated 12 March 2015, from the delegation of Argentina and the\ndelegation of the European Union to the Chairper son of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated\nat the request of these delegations.\n\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body (\"DSB\") adopted its\nrecommendations and rulings in the dispute Argentina — Measures Affecting the Importation of\nGoods (DS438). At the meeting of the DSB held on 23 February 2015, Argentina announced its\nintention to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in this dispute and stated that it\nwould need a reasonable period of time in which to do so.\nArticle 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of\nDisputes (\"DSU\") provides that, in the absence of an agreement between the parties on a period of\ntime, the reasonable period of time shall be determined \"through binding arbitration within\n90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings.\"\nIn order to allow sufficient time for the parties to discuss a mutually agreed period, Argentina and\nthe European Union (i) agree that, in the event an arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU is\nrequested, it shall be completed no later than 60 days after the date of the appointment of an\narbitrator, unless the arbitrator, following consultation with the parties, considers that additional\ntime is required; and (ii) hereby confirm that an y award of the arbitrator (including an award not\nmade within 90 days after the date of adoption of the DSB recommendations and rulings) shall be\ndeemed to be an award of the arbitrator for the purposes of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in\ndetermining the reasonable period of time for Argentina to implement the recommendations and\nrulings of the DSB."},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.442483"}}},{"rowIdx":7199,"cells":{"folder_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"case_number":{"kind":"string","value":"438"},"original_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf"},"new_filename":{"kind":"string","value":"DS438_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf"},"doc_sequence":{"kind":"number","value":9,"string":"9"},"doc_type":{"kind":"string","value":"Agreement_Art_21_3"},"doc_type_raw":{"kind":"string","value":"AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3"},"doc_class":{"kind":"string","value":"NUMBERED"},"variant":{"kind":"null"},"part_number":{"kind":"null"},"case_title":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU"},"date":{"kind":"string","value":"6 July 2015"},"header_codes":{"kind":"string","value":"WT/DS438/22"},"agreement_indicators":{"kind":"string","value":""},"complainant":{"kind":"string","value":"['EU']"},"respondent":{"kind":"string","value":"['Argentina']"},"third_parties":{"kind":"string","value":"['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.']"},"dispute_stage":{"kind":"string","value":"Appellate Body"},"agreements_cited":{"kind":"string","value":"Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994"},"case_summary":{"kind":"string","value":"The summary below was up-to-date at \n 10 October 2016\n\t\t\n\t\tSee also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute\nConsultations\nComplaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)\nOn 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods.\nThe European Union challenges: (i) declarations required as a condition for the approval of imports; (ii) various types of licences required for the importation of certain goods; and (iii) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or failure to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade restrictive commitments.\nThe European Union claims that the challenged measures appear to be inconsistent with:\nOn 31 May 2012, Turkey requested to join the consultations. On 7 June 2012, Ukraine and the United States requested to join the consultations. On 8 June 2012, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Japan requested to join the consultations. On 3 July 2012, Mexico requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, Argentina informed the DSB that it had accepted the requests of Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States to join the consultations. On 6 December 2012, the European Union requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 17 December 2012, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.\n\nPanel and Appellate Body proceedings\nAt its meeting on 28 January 2013, the DSB established a single panel pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU to examine this dispute, DS444 and DS445. Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey and the United States reserved their third party rights. On 15 May 2013, the European Union, the United States and Japan requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 27 May 2013, the Director-General composed the panel. On 15 November 2013, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of May 2014, in accordance with the timetable adopted after consultations with the parties. On 5 May 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that it would not be possible to issue the final report to the parties by the end of May 2014 due to the complexity of the dispute and the large volume of evidence. The panel estimated that it will issue its final report to the parties by the end of June 2014, in accordance with the revised timetable adopted after consultation with the parties.\nOn 22 August 2014, the panel report was circulated to Members.\nOn 26 September 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 1 October 2014, the European Union filed an other appeal in the same dispute.\nOn 15 January 2015, the Appellate Body issued its Reports in DS438, DS444 and DS445 in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports. The appeal was completed in 112 days.\nAt its meeting on 26 January 2015, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.\n\nReasonable period of time\nAt the DSB meeting on 23 February 2015, Argentina informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations, and that it would need a reasonable period of time to do so. On 2 July 2015, Argentina and the European Union informed the DSB that they had agreed on a reasonable period of time for implementation of 11 months and 5 days from the date of adoption of the Appellate Body and panel reports. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time expired on 31 December 2015.\n\nImplementation of adopted reports\nOn 14 January 2016, Argentina notified the DSB that it had fully implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB by ceasing to apply the Trade-Related Requirements and repealing the law which established the Advance Sworn Import Declaration (DJAI) requirement. On 18 January 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement)."},"page_count":{"kind":"number","value":1,"string":"1"},"clean_text":{"kind":"string","value":"ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS\nAGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU\nThe following communication, dated 2 July 2015, from the delegation of Argentina and the\ndelegation of the European Union to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated\nin accordance with Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.\n\nWe wish to inform you that, pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and\nProcedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (\"DSU\"), Argentina and the European Union have\nagreed that the reasonable period of time fo r Argentina to implement the recommendations and\nrulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (\"DSB\") in the dispute Argentina – Measures Affecting the\nImportation of Goods (WT/DS438) shall be 11 months and 5 days from the 26 January 2015 date\nof adoption of the DSB recommendations and rulings. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time\nexpires on 31 December 2015.\n\nWe request that you circulate this notification to the Members of the DSB.\n\n(signed) (signed)\nH.E. Mr Alberto Pedro D'Alotto\nAmbassador\nPermanent Mission of Argentina\nH.E. Mr Angelos Pangratis\nAmbassador\nPermanent Mission of the European Union"},"processing_date":{"kind":"string","value":"2026-03-15T15:56:46.442979"}}}],"truncated":false,"partial":false},"paginationData":{"pageIndex":71,"numItemsPerPage":100,"numTotalItems":9414,"offset":7100,"length":100}},"jwt":"eyJhbGciOiJFZERTQSJ9.eyJyZWFkIjp0cnVlLCJwZXJtaXNzaW9ucyI6eyJyZXBvLmNvbnRlbnQucmVhZCI6dHJ1ZX0sImlhdCI6MTc3OTU3MjAxNCwic3ViIjoiL2RhdGFzZXRzL2RlYW4yMjAyOS9XVE9fRG9jcyIsImV4cCI6MTc3OTU3NTYxNCwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9odWdnaW5nZmFjZS5jbyJ9.UA0GQrGQZRNO1JRSXPxsOIzuajOpIjGtkYsrc9A3y8HwCbVrRe7Smg7ZER4i6wOiHAKRD36DIq2OgiEqhjfbCg","displayUrls":true,"splitSizeSummaries":[{"config":"default","split":"train","numRows":9414,"numBytesParquet":235278256}]},"discussionsStats":{"closed":0,"open":1,"total":1},"fullWidth":true,"hasGatedAccess":true,"hasFullAccess":true,"isEmbedded":false,"savedQueries":{"community":[],"user":[]}}">
folder_number stringclasses 626
values | case_number stringclasses 626
values | original_filename stringlengths 23 61 | new_filename stringlengths 23 61 | doc_sequence int32 1 277 | doc_type stringclasses 42
values | doc_type_raw stringlengths 0 1.4k | doc_class stringclasses 5
values | variant stringclasses 4
values | part_number int32 0 42 ⌀ | case_title stringlengths 0 1.38k | date stringdate 1995-01-13 00:00:00 2025-04-14 00:00:00 ⌀ | header_codes stringlengths 0 267 | agreement_indicators stringclasses 76
values | complainant stringclasses 60
values | respondent stringclasses 63
values | third_parties stringclasses 336
values | dispute_stage stringclasses 7
values | agreements_cited stringclasses 563
values | case_summary stringclasses 617
values | page_count int32 1 1.08k | clean_text stringlengths 67 4.06M | processing_date stringdate 2026-03-15 15:30:25 2026-03-15 16:10:02 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
433 | 431 | DS431_SEQ07_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_01.pdf | DS431_SEQ07_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_01.pdf | 7 | Report_Of_Appellate_Body | AB-2014-6 Reports of the Appellate Body Note: The Appellate Body is issuing these Reports in the form of a single document constituting three separate Appellate Body Reports: WT/DS431/ABR; WT/DS432/AB/R; and WT/DS433/AB/R. The cover page, preliminary pages, sections 1 through 5, and the annexes are common to all three ... | AB_REPORT | null | 1 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM AB-2014-3 AB-2014-5 AB-2014-6 | 7 August 2014 | WT/DS431/AB/R; WT/DS432/AB/R; WT/DS433/AB/R; WT/DS431/ABR; WT/DS432/AB/R; WT/DS433/AB/R.; WT/DS431/ABR; WT/DS432/AB/R; WT/DS433/AB/R | ['U.S.'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1, X:3(a) GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the United States. (See also DS432 and DS433)
On 13 March 2012, the United States requested consultations with China with respect to China’s restrictions on the e... | 177 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION
OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM
AB-2014-3
AB-2014-5
AB-2014-6
Reports of the Appellate Body
Note:
The Appellate Body is issuing these Reports in the form of a single document constituting three
separate Appellate Body Reports: ; ; and The
cover page, preliminary pag... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.313510 | |
433 | 432 | DS432_SEQ01_Working_Procedures.pdf | DS432_SEQ01_Working_Procedures.pdf | 1 | Working_Procedures | AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY CHINA UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | 30 April 2014 | WT/DS432/9; WT/DS433/9 | ['EU'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1, X:3(a) GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS431 and DS433)
On 13 March 2012, the European Union requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the... | 3 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM
NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY CHINA
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),
AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW
The follo... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.344223 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ01_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | DS433_SEQ01_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | 1 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from the European Union | NUMBERED | null | 0 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 26 March 2012 | WT/DS433/2 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the European Union
The following communication, dated 22 March 2012, from the delegation of the
European Union to the delegation of China, the de legation of Japan and to the Chairper... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.492596 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | DS433_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | 2 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from the United States | NUMBERED | null | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 26 March 2012 | WT/DS433/3; WT/DS433/1 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 22 Marc h 2012, from the delegation of the United States
to the delegation of China, the delegation of Japan and to the Chairperso... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.493128 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | DS433_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | 3 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Canada | NUMBERED | null | 2 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS431/4; WT/DS432/4; WT/DS433/4 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 26 March 2012, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegations of China, the United States, the Europ ean Union and Japan and to the Chairpe... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.493671 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | DS433_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | 4 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Acceptance by China of the Requests to Join Consultations Canada, the European Union and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consu ltations requested by the United States, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU. The delegation of China informed the DSB th at it ... | NUMBERED | null | 3 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 16 April 2012 | WT/DS433/5 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Acceptance by China of the Requests to Join Consultations
Canada, the European Union and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body
(DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consu ltations requested by the United States, ... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.494247 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Rev.pdf | DS433_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Rev.pdf | 5 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Acceptance by China of the Requests to Join Consultations Revision Canada, the European Union and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consu ltations requested by Japan, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU. The delegation of China informed the DSB th at it had... | NUMBERED | Rev | null | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 18 April 2012 | WT/DS433/5/Rev.1 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Acceptance by China of the Requests to Join Consultations
Revision
Canada, the European Union and the United States notified the Dispute Settlement Body
(DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consu ltations requested by Japan, pu... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.494816 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ06_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | DS433_SEQ06_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | 6 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Japan | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 29 June 2012 | WT/DS433/6 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 10 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Japan
The following communication, dated 27 June 2012, from the delegation of Japan to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 of the DSU.
On... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.499475 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ07_Note_By_Secretariat.pdf | DS433_SEQ07_Note_By_Secretariat.pdf | 7 | Note_By_Secretariat | Constitution of the Panel Established at the Requests of the United States, the European Union and Japan Note by the Secretariat1 | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 25 September 2012 | WT/DS431/7; WT/DS432/7; WT/DS433/7; WT/DS431/6; WT/DS432/6 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 2 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Requests of the United States,
the European Union and Japan
Note by the Secretariat1
1. At its meeting on 23 July 2012, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a single panel
pursuan... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.500578 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ08_Communication.pdf | DS433_SEQ08_Communication.pdf | 8 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM COMMUNICATION FROM JAPAN AND CHINA CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU | 23 October 2014 | WT/DS433/13 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM
COMMUNICATION FROM JAPAN AND CHINA CONCERNING
ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 20 October 2014, from the delegation of Japan and the
delegation of China to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.501308 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | DS433_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | 9 | Agreement_Art_21_3 | AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3 | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU | 10 December 2014 | WT/DS433/14 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 1 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN, AND MOLYBDENUM
AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 8 December 2014, from the delegation of China and the
delegation of Japan to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.501766 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ10_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | DS433_SEQ10_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | 10 | Agreed_Procedures | Agreed Procedures | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN REGARDING PROCEDURES UNDER ARTICLES 21 AND 22 OF THE DSU | 26 May 2015 | WT/DS433/15 | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 3 | CHINA – MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN
REGARDING PROCEDURES UNDER ARTICLES 21 AND 22 OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 21 May 2015, from the delegation of China and the delegation
of Japan to the Chairperson of the Dispute Se... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.503252 | |
433 | 433 | DS433_SEQ11_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | DS433_SEQ11_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | 11 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by Japan | NUMBERED | null | null | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM | 15 March 2012 | WT/DS433/1; G/L/984 | General Council | ['Japan'] | ['China'] | ['Brazil', 'Canada', 'Colombia', 'EU', 'India', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Taiwan', 'U.S.', 'Vietnam', 'Argentina', 'Australia', 'Indonesia', 'Turkey', 'Peru', 'Russia'] | Appellate Body | Art. XI:1 GATT 1994Part I, para. 1.2, Part I, para. 11.3, Part I, para. 5.1, Protocol of AccessionArt. X:3(a) GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2015
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Japan. (See also DS431 and DS432)
On 13 March 2012, Japan requested consultations with China with respect to China's restrictions on the export of various forms of... | 5 | CHINA - MEASURES RELATED TO THE EXPORTATION OF
RARE EARTHS, TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM
Request for Consultations by Japan
The following communication, dated 13 March 2012, from the delegation of the Japan to the
delegation of China and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with ... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.506302 |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ01_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | DS434_SEQ01_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | 1 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Guatemala | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 26 March 2012 | WT/DS434/2 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Guatemala
The following communication, dated 22 March 2012, from the delegation of Guatemala to the
delegation of Australia, the del... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.786175 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | DS434_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | 2 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Uruguay | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/3; WT/DS434/1 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE
TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Uruguay
The following communication, dated 23 Marc h 2012, from the delegation of Uruguay to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settleme... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.786718 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | DS434_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | 3 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Brazil | NUMBERED | null | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/4 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Brazil
The following communication, dated 26 March 2012, from the delegation of Brazil to the
delegation of Australia, the delegatio... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.787148 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | DS434_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | 4 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Norway | NUMBERED | null | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/5 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Norway
The following communication, dated 23 March 2012, from the delegation of Norway to the
delegation of Australia, the delegatio... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.787591 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_04.pdf | DS434_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_04.pdf | 5 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from the European Union | NUMBERED | null | 4 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/6; WT/DS434/1; G/TBT/D/39; G/L/985; IP/D/30 | General Council; Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT); Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the European Union
The following communication, dated 26 March 2012, from the delegation of the
European Union to the delegation of ... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.788153 |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ06_Request_To_Join_Consultations_05.pdf | DS434_SEQ06_Request_To_Join_Consultations_05.pdf | 6 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from New Zealand | NUMBERED | null | 5 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/7 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from New Zealand
The following communication, dated 26 Marc h 2012, from the delegation of New Zealand to
the delegation of Australia, th... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.788665 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ07_Request_To_Join_Consultations_06.pdf | DS434_SEQ07_Request_To_Join_Consultations_06.pdf | 7 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Canada | NUMBERED | null | 6 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/8 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 26 March 2012, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegation of Australia, the delegatio... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.789197 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ08_Request_To_Join_Consultations_07.pdf | DS434_SEQ08_Request_To_Join_Consultations_07.pdf | 8 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Nicaragua | NUMBERED | null | 7 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 28 March 2012 | WT/DS434/9 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Nicaragua
The following communication, dated 26 March 2012, from the delegation of Nicaragua to the
delegation of Australia, the del... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.789813 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ09_Request_To_Join_Consultations_08.pdf | DS434_SEQ09_Request_To_Join_Consultations_08.pdf | 9 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations Brazil, Canada, the European Union, Guat emala, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway and Uruguay notified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consultations requested by Ukraine, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the DSU. The delegation ... | NUMBERED | null | 8 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 2 April 2012 | WT/DS434/10 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations
Brazil, Canada, the European Union, Guat emala, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway and
Uruguay notified the Dispute Settlement... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.790425 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ10_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel_00.pdf | DS434_SEQ10_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel_00.pdf | 10 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Ukraine | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 17 August 2012 | WT/DS434/11 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 4 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Ukraine
The following communication, dated 14 August 2012, from the delegation of Ukraine to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Bod... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.793134 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ11_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | DS434_SEQ11_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | 11 | Agreed_Procedures | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING (WT/DS435, WT/DS441, WT/DS458, WT/DS467) PROCEDURAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND UKRAINE, HONDURAS, THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, CUBA AND INDONESIA | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING (WT/DS434) | 28 April 2014 | WT/DS434/12; WT/DS435/17; WT/DS441/16; WT/DS458/15; WT/DS467/16 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
(WT/DS434)
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
(WT/DS435, W... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.794336 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ12_Note_By_Secretariat_00.pdf | DS434_SEQ12_Note_By_Secretariat_00.pdf | 12 | Note_By_Secretariat | NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF UKRAINE NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT | 6 May 2014 | WT/DS434/13; WT/DS434/11 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF UKRAINE
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
1. At its meeting on 28 September 2012, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) established a
panel pur... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.795262 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ13_Communication_00.pdf | DS434_SEQ13_Communication_00.pdf | 13 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL | 14 October 2014 | WT/DS434/14 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 10 October 2014, was received from the Chairperson of the
Panel with the request that it be circulated... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.795888 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ14_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel_01.pdf | DS434_SEQ14_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel_01.pdf | 14 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | request for the establishment of a Panel | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL | 27 October 2014 | WT/DS434/15; WT/DS434/11 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 14 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 22 October 2014, was received from the Chairperson of the
Panel with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Set... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.806214 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ15_Communication_01.pdf | DS434_SEQ15_Communication_01.pdf | 15 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL | 3 June 2015 | WT/DS434/16 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 2 June 2015, addressed to the Dispute Settlement Body
(DSB), is circulated in accordance with Article ... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.806710 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ16_Note_By_Secretariat_01.pdf | DS434_SEQ16_Note_By_Secretariat_01.pdf | 16 | Note_By_Secretariat | Note by the Secretariat At the request of Ukraine, the Panel suspended its work on 29 May 2015 (WT/DS434/16). Since the Panel has not been requested to resume its work, pursuant to Article 12.12 of the DSU, the authority for the establishment of the Panel lapsed as of 30 May 2016. AUSTRALIE – CERTAINES MESURES CONCERNA... | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING LAPSE OF AUTHORITY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PANEL | 30 June 2016 | WT/DS434/17; WT/DS434/16 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
LAPSE OF AUTHORITY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PANEL
Note by the Secretariat
At the request of Ukraine, the Panel suspended its work on 29 May 2015 (). Since
the Panel has not been req... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.807351 | |
434 | 434 | DS434_SEQ17_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | DS434_SEQ17_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | 17 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by Ukraine | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 15 March 2012 | WT/DS434/1; G/TBT/D/39; G/L/985; IP/D/30 | General Council; Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT); Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER
PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND
PACKAGING
Request for Consultations by Ukraine
The following communication, dated 13 March 2012, from the delegation of Ukraine to the
delegation of Australia and to the Chairperson of the Dis... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.809149 |
435 | 434 | DS434_SEQ01_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | DS434_SEQ01_Agreed_Procedures.pdf | 1 | Agreed_Procedures | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING (WT/DS435, WT/DS441, WT/DS458, WT/DS467) PROCEDURAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND UKRAINE, HONDURAS, THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, CUBA AND INDONESIA | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING (WT/DS434) | 28 April 2014 | WT/DS434/12; WT/DS435/17; WT/DS441/16; WT/DS458/15; WT/DS467/16 | ['Ukraine'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Dominican', 'Ecuador', 'EU', 'Guatemala', 'Honduras', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Philippines', 'Singapore', 'Taiwan', 'Turkey', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zambia', 'Zimbabwe', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Egypt', 'Malaysia', 'Me... | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 15.1, 15.4, 1.1, 16.1, 16.3, 20, 2.1, 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. I, III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
3 December 2020
Consultations
Complaint by Ukraine. (See also DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 13 March 2012, Ukraine requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations that impose trademark restrictions and other plain packaging ... | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
(WT/DS434)
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
(WT/DS435, W... | 2026-03-15T15:55:49.827496 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_Corr.pdf | DS435_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_Corr.pdf | 1 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by Honduras Corrigendum In document WT/DS435/1, IP/D/31, G/TBT/D/40 and G/L/986, the title should read: AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AUSTRALIE – CERTAINES MESURES... | NUMBERED | Corr | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 23 July 2012 | WT/DS435/1/Corr.1; WT/DS435/1; G/TBT/D/40/Corr.1; G/L/986/Corr.1; G/TBT/D/40; G/L/986; IP/D/31; IP/D/31 | General Council; Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT); Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN
PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request for Consultations by Honduras
Corrigendum
In document , , and , the title should read:
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHE... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.887557 |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | DS435_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations_00.pdf | 2 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Brazil | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 17 April 2012 | WT/DS435/2 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Brazil
The following communication, dated 11 April 2012, from the delegation of Brazil to the
delegation of Australia, the delega ti... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.887982 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | DS435_SEQ03_Request_To_Join_Consultations_01.pdf | 3 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Zimbabwe | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 18 April 2012 | WT/DS435/3 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Zimbabwe
The following communication, received on 16 April 2012, from the delegation of Zimbabwe
to the delegation of Australia, the... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.888438 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | DS435_SEQ04_Request_To_Join_Consultations_02.pdf | 4 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from New Zealand | NUMBERED | null | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 18 April 2012 | WT/DS435/4 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from New Zealand
The following communication, dated 16 April 2012, from the delegation of New Zealand to
the delegation of Australia, the... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.888961 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | DS435_SEQ05_Request_To_Join_Consultations_03.pdf | 5 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Nicaragua | NUMBERED | null | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 18 April 2012 | WT/DS435/5 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Nicaragua
The following communication, dated 12 April 2012, from the delegation of Nicaragua to the
delegation of Australia, the del... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.889432 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ06_Request_To_Join_Consultations_04.pdf | DS435_SEQ06_Request_To_Join_Consultations_04.pdf | 6 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Guatemala | NUMBERED | null | 4 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 19 April 2012 | WT/DS435/6 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Guatemala
The following communication, dated 12 April 2012, from the delegation of Guatemala to the
delegation of Australia, the del... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.889963 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ07_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | DS435_SEQ07_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | 7 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Corrigendum In documents WT/DS435/2, WT/DS435/3, WT/DS435/4 and WT/DS435/5 and WT/DS435/6, the title should read: AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AUSTRALIE – CER... | NUMBERED | Corr | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 July 2012 | WT/DS435/2/Corr.1; WT/DS435/3/Corr.1; WT/DS435/4/Corr.1; WT/DS435/5/Corr.1; WT/DS435/6/Corr.1; WT/DS435/2; WT/DS435/3; WT/DS435/4; WT/DS435/5; WT/DS435/6 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE
TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Corrigendum
In documents , , and and , the title
should read:
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER P... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.890481 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ08_Request_To_Join_Consultations_05.pdf | DS435_SEQ08_Request_To_Join_Consultations_05.pdf | 8 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Uruguay | NUMBERED | null | 5 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 19 April 2012 | WT/DS435/7 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Uruguay
The following communication, dated 18 April 2012, from the delegation of Uruguay to the
delegation of Australia, the delega ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.890871 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ09_Request_To_Join_Consultations_06.pdf | DS435_SEQ09_Request_To_Join_Consultations_06.pdf | 9 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from the European Union | NUMBERED | null | 6 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 20 April 2012 | WT/DS435/8; WT/DS435/1; G/TBT/D/40; G/L/986; IP/D/31 | General Council; Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT); Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the European Union
The following communication, dated 18 April 2012, from the delegation of the
European Union to the delegation of ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.891454 |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ10_Request_To_Join_Consultations_07.pdf | DS435_SEQ10_Request_To_Join_Consultations_07.pdf | 10 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Ukraine | NUMBERED | null | 7 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 20 April 2012 | WT/DS435/9 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Ukraine
The following communication, dated 18 April 2012, from the delegation of Ukraine to the
delegation of Australia, the delega ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.891922 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ11_Request_To_Join_Consultations_08.pdf | DS435_SEQ11_Request_To_Join_Consultations_08.pdf | 11 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Canada | NUMBERED | null | 8 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 23 April 2012 | WT/DS435/10 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 19 April 2012, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegation of Australia, the delega ti... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.892491 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ12_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | DS435_SEQ12_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | 12 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Corrigendum In documents WT/DS435/7, WT/DS435/8, WT/D S435/9 and WT/DS435/10, the title should read: AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AUSTRALIE – CERTAINES MESURE... | NUMBERED | Corr | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 July 2012 | WT/DS435/7/Corr.1; WT/DS435/8/Corr.1; WT/DS435/9/Corr.1; WT/DS435/10/Corr.1; WT/DS435/7; WT/DS435/8; WT/DS435/10 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE
TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Corrigendum
In documents , , WT/D S435/9 and , the title should read:
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.893020 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ13_Request_To_Join_Consultations_09.pdf | DS435_SEQ13_Request_To_Join_Consultations_09.pdf | 13 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from El Salvador | NUMBERED | null | 9 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 April 2012 | WT/DS435/11 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from El Salvador
The following communication, dated 19 April 2012, from the delegation of El Salvador to the
delegation of Australia, the... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.893639 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ14_Request_To_Join_Consultations_10.pdf | DS435_SEQ14_Request_To_Join_Consultations_10.pdf | 14 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Norway | NUMBERED | null | 10 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 April 2012 | WT/DS435/12 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Norway
The following communication, dated 20 April 2012, from the delegation of Norway to the
delegation of Australia, the delega ti... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.894059 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ15_Request_To_Join_Consultations_11.pdf | DS435_SEQ15_Request_To_Join_Consultations_11.pdf | 15 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from the Philippines | NUMBERED | null | 11 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 April 2012 | WT/DS435/13 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from the Philippines
The following communication, dated 20 April 2012, from the delegation of the Philippines to
the delegation of Austra... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.894533 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ16_Request_To_Join_Consultations_12.pdf | DS435_SEQ16_Request_To_Join_Consultations_12.pdf | 16 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Indonesia | NUMBERED | null | 12 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 April 2012 | WT/DS435/14 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Indonesia
The following communication, dated 20 April 2012, from the delegation of Indonesia to the
delegation of Australia, the del... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.894994 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ17_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | DS435_SEQ17_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | 17 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Corrigendum In documents WT/DS435/11, WT/DS435/12, WT/D S435/13 and WT/DS435/14, the title should read: AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AUSTRALIE – CERTAINES MES... | NUMBERED | Corr | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 July 2012 | WT/DS435/11/Corr.1; WT/DS435/12/Corr.1; WT/DS435/13/Corr.1; WT/DS435/14/Corr.1; WT/DS435/11; WT/DS435/12; WT/DS435/14 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS
AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE
TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request to Join Consultations
Corrigendum
In documents , , WT/D S435/13 and , the title should read:
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AN... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.895518 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ18_Request_To_Join_Consultations_13.pdf | DS435_SEQ18_Request_To_Join_Consultations_13.pdf | 18 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations Brazil, Canada, El Salvador, the European Union, Guatemala, Indonesia, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Norway, the Philippines, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Zimbab we notified the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of their desire to be joined in the consultations requested b... | NUMBERED | null | 13 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 27 April 2012 | WT/DS435/15 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations
Brazil, Canada, El Salvador, the European Union, Guatemala, Indonesia, Nicaragua, New Zealand,
Norway, the Philippines, ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.896209 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ19_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | DS435_SEQ19_Request_To_Join_Consultations_Corr.pdf | 19 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations Corrigendum In document WT/DS435/15, the title should read: AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AUSTRALIE – CERTAINES MESURES CONCERN... | NUMBERED | Corr | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 24 July 2012 | WT/DS435/15/Corr.1; WT/DS435/15 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND
OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Acceptance by Australia of the Requests to Join Consultations
Corrigendum
In document , the title should read:
AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDI... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.896726 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ20_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | DS435_SEQ20_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | 20 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Honduras | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 17 October 2012 | WT/DS435/16 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Honduras
The following communication, dated 15 October 2012, from the delegation of Honduras to
the Chairperson ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.898329 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ21_Note_By_Secretariat.pdf | DS435_SEQ21_Note_By_Secretariat.pdf | 21 | Note_By_Secretariat | NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF HONDURAS NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT | 6 May 2014 | WT/DS435/18; WT/DS435/16 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF HONDURAS
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
1. At its meeting on 25 September 2013, the Dispute Settlement Body (D... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.899375 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ22_Note_By_Secretariat_Rev.pdf | DS435_SEQ22_Note_By_Secretariat_Rev.pdf | 22 | Note_By_Secretariat | NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT Revision | NUMBERED | Rev | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF HONDURAS NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT | 12 June 2015 | WT/DS435/18/Rev.1; WT/DS435/16 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
CONSTITUTION OF THE PANEL ESTABLISHED AT THE REQUEST OF HONDURAS
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT
Revision
1. At its meeting on 25 September 2013, the Dispute Settlemen... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.900205 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ23_Communication_00.pdf | DS435_SEQ23_Communication_00.pdf | 23 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL | 14 October 2014 | WT/DS435/19 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 10 October 2014, was received from the Chairperson of the
Panel with the req... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.900840 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ24_Communication_01.pdf | DS435_SEQ24_Communication_01.pdf | 24 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL | 30 June 2016 | WT/DS435/20 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 29 June 2016, was received from the Chairperson of the Panel
with the request that it be circul... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.901488 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ25_Communication_02.pdf | DS435_SEQ25_Communication_02.pdf | 25 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL | 6 December 2016 | WT/DS435/21 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 1 Decembe r 2016 , addressed to the Chairperson of the
Dispute Settlement Bo... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.902031 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ26_Communication_03.pdf | DS435_SEQ26_Communication_03.pdf | 26 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL | 21 September 2017 | WT/DS435/22 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 21 September 2017, addressed to the Chairperson of the
Dispute Settlement Bo... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.902639 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ27_Working_Procedures.pdf | DS435_SEQ27_Working_Procedures.pdf | 27 | Working_Procedures | OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY HONDURAS UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU)... | 25 July 2018 | WT/DS435/23 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 6 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY HONDURAS UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17
OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE
SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU)... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.906674 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ28_Communication_04.pdf | DS435_SEQ28_Communication_04.pdf | 28 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 4 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY | 20 September 2018 | WT/DS435/24; WT/DS441/25 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following communication, dated 17 September 2018, from the Chair of the Appellate Body to
the Chair of the Dispute Se... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.907590 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ29_Understanding.pdf | DS435_SEQ29_Understanding.pdf | 29 | Understanding | Understanding on | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 9 June 2020 | WT/DS435/27; WT/DS441/28 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
The following communication, dated 9 June 2020, from the Presiding Member of the Division hearing
the appeals in , to the Chair of
the Dispute Settlement Body... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.907963 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ30_DSB_Action.pdf | DS435_SEQ30_DSB_Action.pdf | 30 | DSB_Action | Action by the Dispute Settlement Body | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING APPELLATE BODY REPORTS AND PANEL REPORTS | 2 July 2020 | WT/DS435/28; WT/DS441/29; WT/DS435/AB/R; WT/DS435/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS441/AB/R; WT/DS441/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS435/R; WT/DS435/R/Add.1; WT/DS435/R/Suppl.1; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS441/R/Add.1; WT/DS441/R/Su | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
APPELLATE BODY REPORTS AND PANEL REPORTS
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 29 June 2020, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appella... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.908386 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ31_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | DS435_SEQ31_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | 31 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by Honduras | NUMBERED | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 10 April 2012 | WT/DS435/1; G/TBT/D/40; G/L/986; IP/D/31 | General Council; Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT); Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 3 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS AND OTHER
PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND
PACKAGING
Request for Consultations by Honduras
The following communication, dated 4 April 2012, from the delegation of Honduras to the
delegation of Australia and to the Chairperson of the Di... | 2026-03-15T15:56:37.909683 |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ32_Addendum_Add.pdf | DS435_SEQ32_Addendum_Add.pdf | 32 | Addendum | Addendum | NUMBERED | Add | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REPORTS OF THE PANELS | 28 June 2018 | WT/DS435/R/Add.1; WT/DS441/R/Add.1; WT/DS458/R/Add.1; WT/DS467/R/Add.1; WT/DS435/R; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS458/R; WT/DS467/R. | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 225 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REPORTS OF THE PANELS
Addendum
This addendum contains Annexes A to C to the Report s of the Panels to be found in document
• • •
LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX A
WO... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.067378 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ33_Addendum_Add.pdf | DS435_SEQ33_Addendum_Add.pdf | 33 | Addendum | AB-2018-6 Reports of the Appellate Body Addendum | NUMBERED | Add | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AB-2018-4 AB-2018-6 | 9 June 2020 | WT/DS435/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS441/AB/R/Add.1; WT/DS435/AB/R; WT/DS441/AB/R. | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 95 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
AB-2018-4
AB-2018-6
Reports of the Appellate Body
Addendum
This Addendum contains Annexes A to C to the Report s of the Appellate Body circulated as
documents ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.122302 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ34_Report_Of_Panel.pdf | DS435_SEQ34_Report_Of_Panel.pdf | 34 | Report_Of_Panel | SCI redacted, as indicated [[***]] Note: These Panel Reports are in the form of a single document constituting four separate Panel Reports: WT/DS435/R, WT/DS441/R, WT/DS458/R, and WT/DS467/R. The cover page, preliminary pages, sections 1 through 7, appendices, and annexes are common to all four Panel Reports. The page... | PANEL_REPORT | null | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REPORTS OF THE PANELS | 28 June 2018 | WT/DS435/R; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS458/R; WT/DS467/R; WT/DS435/R; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS458/R; WT/DS467/R.; WT/DS435/R; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS458/R; WT/DS467/R | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 888 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REPORTS OF THE PANELS
SCI redacted, as indicated [[***]]
Note:
These Panel Reports are in the form of a single document constituting four separate Panel Repo... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.850946 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ35_Report_Of_Panel_Sup.pdf | DS435_SEQ35_Report_Of_Panel_Sup.pdf | 35 | Report_Of_Panel | Appendices SCI redacted, as indicated [[***]] This supplement contains Appendices A to E to the Reports of the Panels to be found in document WT/DS435/R, WT/DS441/R, WT/DS458/R, WT/DS467/R. | PANEL_REPORT | Sup | null | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING REPORTS OF THE PANELS | 28 June 2018 | WT/DS435/R/Suppl.1; WT/DS441/R/Suppl.1; WT/DS458/R/Suppl.1; WT/DS467/R/Suppl.1; WT/DS435/R; WT/DS441/R; WT/DS458/R; WT/DS467/R. | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 150 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
REPORTS OF THE PANELS
Appendices
SCI redacted, as indicated [[***]]
This supplement contains Appendices A to E to the Reports of the Panels to be found in doc... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.951809 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ36_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_00.pdf | DS435_SEQ36_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_00.pdf | 36 | Report_Of_Appellate_Body | Appellate Body Report | AB_REPORT | null | 0 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 2 April 2020 | WT/DS435/25; WT/DS441/26 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
The following communication, dated 31 March 2020 , from the Presiding Member of the Division
hearing the appeals in ,
to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Bo... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.952190 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ37_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_01.pdf | DS435_SEQ37_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_01.pdf | 37 | Report_Of_Appellate_Body | Appellate Body Report | AB_REPORT | null | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING | 4 June 2020 | WT/DS435/26; WT/DS441/27 | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 1 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
The following communication, dated 4 June 2020, from the Presiding Member of the Division hearing
the appeals in Australia – Certain Measures Concerning Trade... | 2026-03-15T15:56:38.952503 | |
435 | 435 | DS435_SEQ38_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_02.pdf | DS435_SEQ38_Report_Of_Appellate_Body_02.pdf | 38 | Report_Of_Appellate_Body | AB-2018-6 Reports of the Appellate Body Note: The Appellate Body is issuing these Reports in the form of a single document constituting two separate Appellate Body Reports: WT/DS435/AB/R; and WT/DS441/AB/R. The cover page, preliminary pages, sections 1 through 7, and the annexes are common to both Reports. The page h... | AB_REPORT | null | 2 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING AB-2018-4 AB-2018-6 | 9 June 2020 | WT/DS435/AB/R; WT/DS441/AB/R; WT/DS435/AB/R; WT/DS441/AB/R.; WT/DS435/AB/R; WT/DS441/AB/R. | ['Honduras'] | ['Australia'] | ['Argentina', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'Chile', 'China', 'Cuba', 'Dominican', 'EU', 'India', 'Indonesia', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'New Zealand', 'Nicaragua', 'Nigeria', 'Norway', 'Oman', 'Panama', 'Philippines', 'South Africa', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Ukraine', 'U.S.', 'Uruguay', 'Zimbabwe', 'Guatemala', 'Singapore', 'Guatem... | Appellate Body | Art. 20, 16.1, 15.4, 2.1, 24.3, 22.2(b), 3.1 Intellectual Property (TRIPS)Art. 2.1, 2.2 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. III:4 GATT 1994Art. 8, 17 Intellectual Property (TRIPS) | The summary below was up-to-date at
28 July 2020
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by Honduras. (See also DS434, DS441, DS458 and DS467)
On 4 April 2012, Honduras requested consultations with Australia concerning certain Australian laws and regulations... | 232 | AUSTRALIA – CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING TRADEMARKS,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AND OTHER PLAIN PACKAGING
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING
AB-2018-4
AB-2018-6
Reports of the Appellate Body
Note:
The Appellate Body is issuing these Reports in the form of a single document constituting
two separate... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.125916 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | DS436_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | 1 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by India | NUMBERED | null | 1 | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA | 18 April 2012 | WT/DS436/1; G/L/987; G/SCM/D89/1 | General Council; Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 7 | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
Request for Consultations by India
The following communication, dated 12 April 2012, from the delegation of India to the
delegation of the United States and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circul... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.322000 |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations.pdf | DS436_SEQ02_Request_To_Join_Consultations.pdf | 2 | Request_To_Join_Consultations | Request to Join Consultations Communication from Canada | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA | 10 May 2012 | WT/DS436/2 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 7 May 2 012, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegation of the United States, the delegation of India and to the Chairpe... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.322557 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ03_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | DS436_SEQ03_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | 3 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | Request for the Establishment of a Panel by India | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA | 13 July 2012 | WT/DS436/3 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 10 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by India
The following communication, dated 12 July 2012, from the delegation of India to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.326943 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ04_Communication_00.pdf | DS436_SEQ04_Communication_00.pdf | 4 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 0 | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL | 9 July 2013 | WT/DS436/5 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES - COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 8 July 2013, wa s received from the Chairperson of the Panel
with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB).
Article 12.8 of ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.327490 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ05_Working_Procedures.pdf | DS436_SEQ05_Working_Procedures.pdf | 5 | Working_Procedures | AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE UNITED STATES UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDUR... | 18 August 2014 | WT/DS436/7 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 2 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE UNITED STATES
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),
AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDUR... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.328963 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ06_Communication_01.pdf | DS436_SEQ06_Communication_01.pdf | 6 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY | 8 October 2014 | WT/DS436/8 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 6 October 2014, from the Chair of the Appellate Body
addressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance
... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.329810 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ07_Communication_02.pdf | DS436_SEQ07_Communication_02.pdf | 7 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 2 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU | 9 February 2015 | WT/DS436/12 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA CONCERNING
ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 6 February 2015, from the delegation of the United States
and the delegation of India to the Chairpe... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.330551 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ08_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | DS436_SEQ08_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | 8 | Agreement_Art_21_3 | AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3 | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU | 27 March 2015 | WT/DS436/13 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 24 March 2015, from the delegation of India and the
delegation of the United States to the Chairperso n of the Dispute Settlement Body, is cir... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.331144 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ09_Addendum_Add4.pdf | DS436_SEQ09_Addendum_Add4.pdf | 9 | Addendum | Addendum | NUMBERED | Add | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES | 11 March 2016 | WT/DS436/14/Add.4 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 2 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES
Addendum
The following communication, dated 10 March 2016, from the delegation of the United States to
the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.332142 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ10_Implementation_Report.pdf | DS436_SEQ10_Implementation_Report.pdf | 10 | Implementation_Report | implementation of the recommendations | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU | 10 March 2016 | WT/DS436/15 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 9 March 2016, from the delegation of India and the delegation
of the United States to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circu... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.332603 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ11_Report_Of_Panel.pdf | DS436_SEQ11_Report_Of_Panel.pdf | 11 | Report_Of_Panel | panel report | PANEL_REPORT | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA JOINT COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA | 28 November 2014 | WT/DS436/9 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN
HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
JOINT COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA
The following communication, dated 6 November 2014, from the delegation of the United States
and the delegation of India to the Presiding Member of the Appellate Body ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.333301 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ12_Report_Of_Appellate_Body.pdf | DS436_SEQ12_Report_Of_Appellate_Body.pdf | 12 | Report_Of_Appellate_Body | Report of the Appellate Body | AB_REPORT | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY | 10 December 2014 | WT/DS436/10; WT/DS436/AB/R. | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 8 December 2014, from the Chair of the Appellate Body addressed
to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.333626 | |
436 | 436 | DS436_SEQ13_Appellate_Body_Report_And_Panel_Report.pdf | DS436_SEQ13_Appellate_Body_Report_And_Panel_Report.pdf | 13 | Appellate_Body_Report_And_Panel_Report | APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT | AB_REPORT | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT ACTION BY THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BODY | 22 December 2014 | WT/DS436/11; WT/DS436/AB/R; WT/DS436/R; WT/DS436/R/Add.1 | ['India'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'EU', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Turkey'] | Mutually Agreed Solution | Art. 12, 14, 15, 19, 32 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI GATT 1994Art. 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. I GATT 1994Art. XVI:4 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization | The summary below was up-to-date at
24 August 2023
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by India.
On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certai... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA
APPELLATE BODY REPORT AND PANEL REPORT
ACTION BY THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BODY
At its meeting on 19 December 2014, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body
report on United States – Countervailing Measures on... | 2026-03-15T15:56:39.334317 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | DS437_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | 1 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by China | NUMBERED | null | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA | 30 May 2012 | WT/DS437/1; G/L/988; G/SCM/D90/1 | General Council; Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 10 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON
CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
Request for Consultations by China
The following communication, dated 25 May 2012, from the delegation of China to the
delegation of the United States and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Ar... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.207117 |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ02_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | DS437_SEQ02_Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel.pdf | 2 | Request_For_Establishment_Of_Panel | Request for the Establishment of a Panel by China | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA | 21 August 2012 | WT/DS437/2 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 9 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON
CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by China
The following communication, dated 20 August 2012, from the delegation of China to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 of the DSU.
On 25 May... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.212306 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ03_Note_By_Secretariat_Corr.pdf | DS437_SEQ03_Note_By_Secretariat_Corr.pdf | 3 | Note_By_Secretariat | Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of China Note by the Secretariat Corrigendum Please note that the first sentence of pa ragraph 3 should be amended to read: | NUMBERED | Corr | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA | 5 December 2012 | WT/DS437/3/Corr.1 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES
ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of China
Note by the Secretariat
Corrigendum
Please note that the first sentence of pa ragraph 3 should be amended to read:
3. On 14 November 2012, China requested the Director-General ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.212526 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ04_Communication_00.pdf | DS437_SEQ04_Communication_00.pdf | 4 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL | NUMBERED | null | 0 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA | 21 February 2013 | WT/DS437/4; WT/DS437/2 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 13 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES
ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 14 February 2013, was received from the Chairperson
of the Panel with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB").
On 14 December 2012, the United ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.220901 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf | DS437_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf | 5 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PANEL | 19 November 2013 | WT/DS437/6 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES
ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 18 November 2013, addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated pursuant to Article 12.9 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding (DS... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.221502 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ06_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | DS437_SEQ06_Request_For_Consultations.pdf | 6 | Request_For_Consultations | REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS | NUMBERED | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 21.5 OF THE DSU BY CHINA REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS | 23 May 2016 | WT/DS437/20 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 15 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON
CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 21.5 OF THE DSU BY CHINA
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS
The following communication, dated 13 May 2016, from the delegation of China to the delegation
of the United States and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.228397 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ07_Addendum_Add.pdf | DS437_SEQ07_Addendum_Add.pdf | 7 | Addendum | Addendum BCI omitted, as indicated [[***]] | NUMBERED | Add | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA DECISION BY THE ARBITRATOR | 26 January 2022 | WT/DS437/ARB/Add.1; WT/DS437/ARB. | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 63 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS
FROM CHINA
DECISION BY THE ARBITRATOR
Addendum
BCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]
This addendum contains Annexes A to C to the Decision of the Arbitrator to be found in document
BCI omitted, as indicated [[***]]
LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX A
WORKING PROCEDURE... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.253978 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ08_Recourse.pdf | DS437_SEQ08_Recourse.pdf | 8 | Recourse | RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6 | RECOURSE | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES | 28 October 2019 | WT/DS437/31 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES
ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 22.6 OF THE DSU BY THE UNITED STATES
The following communication, dated 25 October 2019, from the delegation of the United States to
the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 22.6 of t... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.254582 | |
437 | 437 | DS437_SEQ09_Request_For_Arbitration.pdf | DS437_SEQ09_Request_For_Arbitration.pdf | 9 | Request_For_Arbitration | REQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION | ARBITRATION | null | null | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA REQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU | 30 June 2015 | WT/DS437/14 | ['China'] | ['U.S.'] | ['Australia', 'Brazil', 'Canada', 'EU', 'India', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Russia', 'Turkey', 'Vietnam', 'Saudi Arabia'] | Implementation & Compliance | Art. 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 1.1(a)(1), 2, 1.1(b), 14(d), 12.7, 1.1, 10, 32.1 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI, XXIII GATT 1994Art. 30 Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 15 Protocol of Accession | The summary below was up-to-date at
26 January 2022
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by China.
On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on cert... | 1 | UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON
CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
REQUEST BY CHINA FOR ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 26 June 2015, from the delegation of China to the
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.
... | 2026-03-15T15:56:41.255168 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | DS438_SEQ01_Request_For_Consultations_01.pdf | 1 | Request_For_Consultations | Request for Consultations by the European Union | NUMBERED | null | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS | 30 May 2012 | WT/DS438/1; G/L/989; G/AG/GEN/101; G/LIC/D/40; G/TRIMS/D/29; G/SG/D42/1 | Agriculture (AG); General Council; Import Licensing (LIC); Safeguards (SG); Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 4 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION
OF GOODS
Request for Consultations by the European Union
The following communication, dated 25 May 2012, from the delegation of the
European Union to the delegation of Argentina an d to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Art... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.436511 |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ02_Communication_00.pdf | DS438_SEQ02_Communication_00.pdf | 2 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 0 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL | 7 May 2014 | WT/DS438/14; WT/DS444/13; WT/DS445/13 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE PANEL
The following communication, dated 5 May 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 ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.437139 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ03_Working_Procedures_00.pdf | DS438_SEQ03_Working_Procedures_00.pdf | 3 | Working_Procedures | AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | NUMBERED | null | 0 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY ARGENTINA UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | 29 September 2014 | WT/DS438/15; WT/DS444/14; WT/DS445/14 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 3 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
NOTIFICATION OF AN APPEAL BY ARGENTINA
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),
AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW
The following notification, dated... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.439113 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ04_Working_Procedures_01.pdf | DS438_SEQ04_Working_Procedures_01.pdf | 4 | Working_Procedures | AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | NUMBERED | null | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU), AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW | 2 October 2014 | WT/DS438/16 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),
AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW
The following notif... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.440025 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf | DS438_SEQ05_Communication_01.pdf | 5 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY | 24 November 2014 | WT/DS438/17; WT/DS444/15; WT/DS445/16 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 20 November 2014, from the Chair of the Appellate Body
addressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance
with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on ... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.440784 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ06_Communication_02.pdf | DS438_SEQ06_Communication_02.pdf | 6 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 2 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION | 11 December 2014 | WT/DS438/18; WT/DS444/17; WT/DS445/18 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION
The following communication, dated 9 December 2014, from the delegation of the European Union
to the Presiding Member of the Appellate Body Division in this dispute, is circulated at the request
of this delegation.
The Europe... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.441492 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ07_Communication_03.pdf | DS438_SEQ07_Communication_03.pdf | 7 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 3 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY | 19 January 2015 | WT/DS438/19; WT/DS444/19; WT/DS445/20; WT/DS438/AB/R; WT/DS444/AB/R; WT/DS445/AB/R. | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
COMMUNICATION FROM THE APPELLATE BODY
The following notification, dated 15 January 2015, from the Chair of the Appellate Body
addressed to the Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated to Members in accordance
with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on R... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.441814 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ08_Communication_04.pdf | DS438_SEQ08_Communication_04.pdf | 8 | Communication | COMMUNICATION FROM | NUMBERED | null | 4 | ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU | 13 March 2015 | WT/DS438/21 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING
ARTICLE 21.3(C) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 12 March 2015, from the delegation of Argentina and the
delegation of the European Union to the Chairper son of the Dispute Settlement Body... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.442483 | |
438 | 438 | DS438_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | DS438_SEQ09_Agreement_Art_21_3.pdf | 9 | Agreement_Art_21_3 | AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3 | NUMBERED | null | null | ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU | 6 July 2015 | WT/DS438/22 | ['EU'] | ['Argentina'] | ['Australia', 'Canada', 'China', 'Ecuador', 'Guatemala', 'India', 'Israel', 'Japan', 'South Korea', 'Norway', 'Saudi Arabia', 'Switzerland', 'Taiwan', 'Thailand', 'Turkey', 'U.S.'] | Appellate Body | Art. X:1, X:3, XI:1 GATT 1994Art. 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(f) Import LicensingArt. III:4 GATT 1994 | The summary below was up-to-date at
10 October 2016
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Consultations
Complaint by the European Union. (See also DS444, DS445 and DS446,)
On 25 May 2012, the European Union requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures impos... | 1 | ARGENTINA - MEASURES AFFECTING THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS
AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 21.3(B) OF THE DSU
The following communication, dated 2 July 2015, from the delegation of Argentina and the
delegation of the European Union to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated
in accordance with Article 21.3(b)... | 2026-03-15T15:56:46.442979 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.