Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- European Communities – Anti-Dumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe Fittings from Brazil (WT/DS219): Report of the Panel
- United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS248, WT/DS249, WT/DS251, WT/DS252, WT/DS253, WT/DS254, WT/DS258 WT/DS259): Report of the Appellate Body
- Cumulative Index of Published Disputes
United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS248, WT/DS249, WT/DS251, WT/DS252, WT/DS253, WT/DS254, WT/DS258 WT/DS259): Report of the Appellate Body
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- European Communities – Anti-Dumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe Fittings from Brazil (WT/DS219): Report of the Panel
- United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS248, WT/DS249, WT/DS251, WT/DS252, WT/DS253, WT/DS254, WT/DS258 WT/DS259): Report of the Appellate Body
- Cumulative Index of Published Disputes
Summary
INTRODUCTION
The United States appeals certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed in the Panel Reports, United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (the “Panel Reports”).
The Panel was established by the DSB on 3 June 2002, pursuant to a request by the European Communities, to examine the consistency of ten safeguard measures applied by the United States on 20 March 2002 on imports of certain steel products. On 14 June 2002, pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU, the DSB referred to the Panel complaints on the same matter brought by Japan and Korea. On 24 June 2002, the DSB, pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU, also referred to this single Panel complaints on the same matter submitted by China, Norway, and Switzerland. On 8 July 2002, the DSB, pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU, also referred to this single Panel a complaint on the same matter submitted by New Zealand. On 29 July 2002, the DSB, pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU, also referred to this single Panel a complaint on the same matter submitted by Brazil.
In their requests for the establishment of a panel, the Complaining Parties claimed that the ten safeguard measures applied by the United States on imports of certain steel products were inconsistent with the obligations of the United States contained in Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 12 of the Agreement on Safeguards, Articles I, II, X, XIII, and XIX of the GATT 1994, as well as Article XVI of the WTO Agreement.
The Panel issued eight Panel Reports—in the form of one document—that were circulated to the Members of the WTO on 11 July 2003. The Panel concluded, in all of the Panel Reports, that all ten safeguard measures imposed by the United States were inconsistent with the Agreement on Safeguards and the GATT 1994.
In particular, the Panel found that:
(a) the application of safeguard measures by the United States on imports of CCFRS, hot-rolled bar, and stainless steel rod was inconsistent with Articles 2.1 and 3.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards, because “the United States failed to provide a reasoned and adequate explanation of how the facts supported its determination with respect to ‘increased imports'”;
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Dispute Settlement Reports 2003 , pp. 3117 - 3260Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005
- 7
- Cited by