| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Decisions of the Appellate Body of the World
Trade Organization
Current Survey
Guatemala--Anti-Dumping Investigation Regarding Portland Cement from Mexico
Joel P. Trachtman*
Full text of WTO Appellate Body Report on WTO web site
WTO Appellate Body Report: Guatemala--Anti-Dumping Investigation Regarding Portland Cement from Mexico, AB-1998-6, WT/DS60/AB/R (98-4190), adopted by Dispute Settlement Body, 25 November 1998. Guatemala, Appellant; Mexico, Appellee; United States, Third Participant. Division: Lacarte-Muró, Beeby and El-Naggar. Major Topics Addressed by Appellate Body: Relationship of DSU to Anti-Dumping Agreement; Requirements for Commencement of Panel Proceedings.
1. Abstract
This is the first Appellate Body decision regarding the Anti-Dumping Agreement. It is a lawyer’s case, insofar as it deals largely with procedure and jurisdiction, and little with substantive obligations. This decision involves claims made by Mexico regarding Guatemala’s anti-dumping investigation of portland cement from Mexico, including the initiation and conduct of the investigation. Guatemala raised a number of procedural and jurisdictional issues regarding the Anti-Dumping Agreement and its relationship with the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).
The Appellate Body held that the DSU and the dispute resolution provisions of the Anti- Dumping Agreement are to be read together, as a “comprehensive, integrated dispute settlement system for the WTO Agreement,1 thus rejecting the kind of “balkanization” of dispute resolution that characterized the post-Tokyo Round GATT system. Critical among the issues addressed was the definition of the type of measure or matter that may form the basis for dispute resolution proceedings under the Anti-Dumping Agreement. The Appellate Body held that Mexico failed specifically to identify the final anti-dumping duty or the provisional measure imposed by Guatemala as a measure at issue. The dispute was therefore not properly before the panel. At the core of this dispute is the question of whether “pre-measure” review is available in anti-dumping matters. The Appellate Body determined that it is not, but that under art. 17.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, WTO dispute resolution is only available after and with respect to the imposition of provisional measures (under limited circumstances), or a final action to levy definitive anti-dumping duties, or a final action to accept price undertakings.
*
Professor of International Law, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts
University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155, USA.
1
Appellate Body Report, para. 66.
© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part
of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European
Law at the European University
Institute.
This file was last modified:
Tuesday, October 14, 2003 01:13PM