SUBJECT INDEX BY CASE: APPELLATE BODY REPORTS

M-S

 

Index:  A  B  C-D  E-F  G-H  I  J  K-L  M-S  T  U-Z 


ON THIS PAGE:

Mexico — Anti—Dumping Measures on Rice
Mexico Corn Syrup (Article 21.5 US)
Mexico Taxes on Soft Drinks


Mexico — Anti-Dumping Measures on Rice (WT/DS295/AB/R)     back to top

Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD) / GATT 1994 VI relationship, “may levy” (GATT VI:2), critical date A.3.16.4

burden of proof

legislation as such, challenge to B.3.2.18

prima facie case, text of legislation, sufficiency B.3.2.18

standard of proof B.3.2.18

consultations (DSU 4), measure at issue (DSU 4.4), as identified in request for establishment of panel (DSU 6.2), need for identity with R.2.2.21-2

countervailing duties (SCM, Part V), non-discriminatory basis (SCM 19.3), expedited review, right to S.2.27.3

determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15)

“positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1)

“objective examination” A.3.17.5

“positive” A.3.16.4-5

duration and review of anti-dumping duties and price undertakings / countervailing measures (AD 11/SCM 21)

obligation to review (AD 11.2/SCM 21.2) A.3.44B.1-2, S.2.31.8-9

requirements (AD 11.2/SCM 21.2) A.3.44B.1-2

elapse of reasonable period of time A.3.44B.1-2, S.2.31.8-9

“positive information” A.3.44B.1, S.2.31.8

evidentiary rules (AD 6/SCM 12)

“ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence” (AD 6.1)

applicability to all exporters and foreign producers receiving questionnaire A.3.30.1.6-7, S.2.21B.1-2

entitlement of “known” producers to receive text of application (AD 6.1.3) A.3.30.2.1

“ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence” (AD 6.1/SCM/12.1)

right to impose time-limits (AD 6.1.1/SCM 12.1.1)

dies a quo (Art. 6.1.1, footnote 15) A.3.30.1.5-6

time-limits for investigation (AD 5.10/SCM 11.11) and A.3.28B.1, S.2.21A.1

“facts available” S.2.21C.1

facts available to investigating authority, right to use (AD 6.8/AD Annex II/SCM 12.7), failure to submit necessary information “within reasonable period” (AD 6.8) / “reasonable time” (Annex II, para. 1) and A.3.33.3-4

“known exporter or producer” (AD 6.10) A.3.37.1.1

imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties (AD 9)

new shipper reviews (AD 9.5) A.3.44A.1

prospective assessment (AD 9.3.2) A.3.40A.1, A.3.40B.1-2, A.3.44B.2

retrospective assessment (AD 9.3.1) A.3.40A.1

investigation of dumping (AD 5) / subsidy (SCM 11)

termination (AD 5.8/SCM 11.9)

de minimus standard, applicability, individual de minimus margin, need for A.3.28A.1

exporters excluded from definitive anti-dumping measure and A.3.28A.4

issuance of order / decision not to issue as “terminating” step A.3.28A.3

unified nature of investigation and A.3.28A.2

time-limits (AD 5.10/SCM 11.11) A.3.28B, A.3.28B.1, S.2.21A.1

judicial economy, “positive solution to dispute” requirement and C.7.23, R.2.2.23

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel), identity of claims at time of consultations (DSU 4.4) and panel request (DSU 6.2), relevance C.7.21-2, R.2.2.21-2

legislation as such, right to challenge, burden of proof and B.3.2.18

public notice and explanation of determinations on anti-dumping investigation / countervailing duties (AD 12/SCM 22), “interested parties known to the investigating authorities” (AD 12.1) A.3.53A.1

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”), reliance on translation subsequently disputed S.3.2.8, S.7.3.29

“objective assessment of matter before it”, failure to analyse evidence S.3.2.7, S.7.3.28

 
Mexico — Corn Syrup (Article 21.5 — US) (WT/DS132/AB/RW)     back to top

competence (panels)

objections, requirements

specificity/explicitness D.2.2.13, O.1.5-6, P.3.1.7

timeliness D.2.2.13, D.2.2.15, O.1.5-6, P.3.1.7

waiver of right, implied D.2.2.15, O.1.6

obligation to examine

ex proprio motu C.7.10, D.2.2.12, J.1.13, J.2.1.12-13

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7) O.1.7, R.5.4

consultations (DSU 4)

agreed solution, possibility of C.7.5

benefits C.7.5

third parties C.7.5

clarification of issues and C.7.5

establishment of panel, as prerequisite C.7.6, R.2.4.2

exceptions R.2.4.2

agreement within 60 day period that consultations have failed to settle dispute (DSU 4.7) C.7.7

party’s failure to respond to request for or enter into consultations (DSU 4.3) C.7.6, C.7.7, C.7.9

recognition of possibility (DSU 6.2) C.7.8-9

panel’s obligation to address absence of consultations C.7.10

determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15)

threat of material injury (AD 3.7) A.3.27.1-2

determination “based on facts, not merely allegation, conjecture or remote possibility” A.3.27.1

a “clearly foreseen and imminent” change of circumstances, need for A.3.27.2

as responsibility of investigating authorities A.3.27.1

DSU, applicability (DSU 1.1), security and predictability as objective (DSU 3.2) R.4.3.2

due process (dispute settlement proceedings)

panel reports, rationale (DSU 12.7) and P.1.1.4-5

panel’s obligation to address issues raised by parties (DSU 7.2/12.7) D.2.2.12, D.2.2.14, J.1.13, J.2.1.12

good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VCLT 26)), objections to panel procedures D.2.2.13, O.1.6, P.3.1.7

interpretation of covered agreements, object and purpose C.7.6

judicial economy J.1.13

panel’s discretionary power to determine, which claims must be examined, obligation to address claims not examined J.1.13

panel reports

rationale, need for (DSU 12.7) P.1.1.4-5

direct quotation from previous report, desirability P.1.1.5

due process/transparency/fairness and P.1.1.4-5

sufficiency to disclose essential or fundamental justification P.1.1.4

reference to previous panel report (DSU 21.5) P.1.1.4

surety and predictability of WTO obligations (DSU 3.2), aid to P.1.1.4

procedure, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes and O.1.5-6

prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3)

procedure, role O.1.5-6

review of implementation of DSB rulings and R.4.3.2

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2)

consultations, indication as to whether held C.7.8, R.2.4.2

panel’s obligation to examine absence C.7.10

fruitfulness of action, determination by Member R.5.4

review of implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21.5)

competence of DSU 21.5 (compliance) panel, as continuance of original proceedings R.4.3.3

as a continuum of events R.4.3.3

objectives, prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes (DSU 3) and R.4.3.2

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6)

assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.58.4, A.3.59.6-7

“unbiased and objective” A.3.58.4

authorities’ establishment of facts (AD 17.6(i)), “proper” A.3.58.4

“facts made available” (AD 17.5(ii)), limitation to A.3.59.6-7

interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)), assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) and, cumulative effect A.3.58.4

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7)

fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures R.5.4

obligation for panel to examine proprio motu, whether R.5.4

self-regulating nature of provision R.5.4

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), objections, requirements, good faith D.2.2.13, O.1.6, P.3.1.7

 
Mexico — Taxes on Soft Drinks (WT/DS308/AB/R)     back to top

amicus curiae briefs, NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.14

competence (panels)

alternative forum, availability and T.6.1.15

compétence de la compétence J.2.1.16, T.6.1.12

competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2/DSU 11)

correct interpretation and application of covered agreements and C.3.1.2, C.3.2.4

determination of violation of non-WTO agreement, exclusion C.5.2, J.2.1.20, J.2.1.22, P.3.8.1

not to add to or diminish rights and obligations (DSU 3.2/19.2), refusal to exercise jurisdiction C.3.2.3, J.2.1.16-22, R.5.8, S.7.2.12, T.6.1.12

conditional appeal, non-fulfilment of condition C.5.4

estoppel, prevention of recourse to dispute settlement mechanism P.3.8.1

General Exceptions (GATT XX)

measures necessary to secure compliance with GATT-consistent measure (GATT XX(d))

“laws or regulations” G.3.5A.1-2

“international agreements” (GATT XX(h)) distinguished G.3.5A.2

international obligations of another WTO Member, exclusion G.3.5B.2-4

“to secure compliance” G.3.5B.1-4, S.7.3.30

“necessary” distinguished G.3.5B.2, G.3.6.8

measures undertaken under any international government commodity agreement (GATT XX(h)), “laws and regulations” (GATT XX(d)) distinguished G.3.5A.2

judicial economy J.2.1.21, T.6.1.16

necessity test (GATT XX(d))

relevant factors

contribution to realization of end pursued and (objective-pursued test) G.3.6.7

“to secure compliance” requirement G.3.5B.2, G.3.6.7-8

prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), impairment of benefits by measures taken by another Member (DSU 3.3) R.5.7-8

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”), finding of non-justifiability in law, relevance S.7.3.30

“such other findings as will assist the DSB” (DSU 7.1/DSU 11) S.7.2.12

suspension of concessions (DSU 22), authorization, need for (DSU 3.7, 22.6 and 23.2(c)) S.9.3

terms of reference of panels (DSU 7)

obligations

to address relevant provisions in covered agreement[s] cited by parties (DSU 7.2) T.6.2.21

to examine entirety of claims J.2.1.16-22

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), documents (WP 18), correction of clerical errors in submissions W.2.6A.1

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), panel’s discretion, limitationsJ.2.1.16-22, T.6.1.12-16

 


The texts reproduced here do not have the legal standing of the original documents which are entrusted and kept at the WTO Secretariat in Geneva.