- Country or region
- Trade topics
- Dispute settlement
- Dispute settlement
- WTO - Complaint against the EU
Summary of the case
- Complaint by: China
- Complaint against: EU
- Third parties: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, India, Japan, Norway, Taiwan (Chinese Taipei), Thailand, Turkey, United States
On 31 July 2009, China requested WTO consultations on Article 9(5) of the EC Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96) and on Council Regulation (EC) No. 91/2009 of 26 January 2009 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners in China. Consultations were held on 14 September 2009 in Geneva.
On 23 October 2009, the DSB established a panel. The WTO Director-General determined the three panellists on 9 December 2009 (Mr Luiz Baptista, (Chair); Mr Michael Mulgrew, Mr Arie Reich).
On 3 December 2010, the panel circulated its report.
The report has two parts:
The first part relates to Article 9(5), the provision in the EU Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation on so-called "individual treatment" of exporters from non-market economy countries. "Individual treatment", i.e. to give a company specific duty rate to a non-market economy exporter, is only granted to those non-market economy companies that can demonstrate their independence from the State. This is an important provision to prevent a State from channelling all dumped exports via the State company that meets the lowest duty rate. In the view of this panel, there was no basis in the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement to condition the granting of an individual margin and duty rate on compliance with "individual treatment" criteria.
The case was limited to the calculation of an individual dumping margin and an individual duty ("individual treatment"). It is important to note that this finding does not concern the Market Economy Status of China: Market Economy Status and Market Economy Treatment relate to the calculation of normal value. This important matter was not at issue here.
The second part of the panel report concerned Council Regulation 91/2009 which imposed customs duties on certain iron or steel fasteners from China.
On this specific measure itself, the panel found that in the great majority of the issues examined, the EU has acted in full compliance with WTO rules. The panel found some violations of WTO law which had no effect on the general soundness of the measure.
On 25 March 2011, the European Union notified its decision to appeal to the WTO Appellate Body certain issues of the Panel report. As regards the first part, the European Union appeals the finding of the Panel on "individual treatment". With regard to the second part, the European Union appeals the Panel's finding on disclosure of normal value determination and the confidentiality issues in view of the systemic issues involved.
Relevant WTO provision: As such claim: Articles 6.10; 9.2; 9.3; 9.4 of the AD Agreement; Article I of GATT 1994; Article XVI:4 of the Marrakesh Agreement and Article 18.4 of the AD Agreement; Article X:3(a) of GATT 1994. ; As applied claim: Articles 6.1.1 AD Agreement, Part I, paragraph 15 of China’s Protocol of Accession and paragraph 151 (d) and (e) of the Working Party Report on the Accession of China; Articles 6.10; 9.2 AD Agreement; Article I of GATT 1994; Article 12.2.2 AD Agreement and paragraph 151 (f) of the Working Party Report on the Accession of China; Articles 5.4; 2.1 and 2.6 AD Agreement; 2.4 AD Agreement and VI:1 GATT 1994; 2.4.2 AD Agreement and VI:1 GATT 1994; 3.1 and 3.2 AD Agreement; 4.1, 3.1, 3.4 and 3.5 AD Agreement; 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 AD Agreement; 3.1, 3.2 and 3.4 AD Agreement; 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 AD Agreement; 6.2, 6.4 AD Agreement and paragraph 151 (c)(e) of the Working Party Report on the Accession of China; 6.2 and 6.9 AD Agreement; 6.2, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.5.1 AD Agreement; 6.5 AD Agreement.;
- Consultations requested: 04 August 2009
- Panel requested: 13 October 2009
- Appeal requested: 25 March 2011