INTRODUCTION

On 19 June 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body (the “DSB”) adopted the Appellate Body Report, and the Panel Report as modified by the Appellate Body Report, in Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry (“Canada - Automotive Industry”). On 19 July 2000, Canada informed the DSB, pursuant to Article 21.3 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (the “DSU”), that it would implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute. At the DSB meeting of 27 July 2000, Canada said that it would require a “reasonable period of time” to do so, under the terms of Article 21.3 of the DSU, with regard to certain aspects of the measures at issue in the dispute, in particular, the DSB's recommendations pursuant to Article I:1 and Article III:4 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (“GATT 1994”) and Article XVII of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”).

In view of the impossibility to reach an agreement with Canada on the period of time required for the implementation of those recommendations and rulings, the European Communities and Japan requested that such period be determined by binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.

By joint letter of 23 August 2000, Canada, the European Communities and Japan notified the DSB that they had agreed that the duration of the “reasonable period of time” for implementation should be determined through binding arbitration, under the terms of Article 21.3(c) of the DSU, and that I should act as Arbitrator. The parties also indicated in that letter that they had agreed to extend the time period for the arbitration, fixed at 90 days by Article 21.3(c) of the DSU, until 6 October 2000. Notwithstanding this extension of the time period, the parties stated that the arbitration award would be deemed to be an award made under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. My acceptance of this designation as Arbitrator was conveyed to the parties by letter of 24 August 2000.