WTO DSB News item, 17 February 2005
[The following is an extract from the WTO news item]
The Dispute Settlement Body on 17 February 2005 set up two panels to examine, respectively, the United States ' and Canada 's continued sanctions against the European Communities' import ban on hormone-treated beef. At the same meeting, the DSB set up at the EC's request a panel to examine the US ' compliance in the Foreign Sales Corporation case.
Requests for panel
These are cases that have completed the consultation phase, the first stage of a dispute. When consultations have failed, member governments are entitled to ask for a panel to be set up to examine the dispute. According to the rules, the respondent can reject the first request. At the second request, a panel is automatically established.
DS320: United States — Continued suspension of obligations in the EC — Hormones dispute
In its second panel request, the EC wondered how much time the US would need to review the studies and documents supporting the new EC Hormones Directive. The EC commented that the new Directive had already been in place for more than a year. The EC said it would respond to the US ' request under the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement for an explanation of the reasons for the new EC Hormones Directive.
The US said that it had requested this explanation on 13 December 2004 and complained about the EC's lack of response. The US had hoped that the EC would provide the scientific evidence and explanation behind its new measure before seeking a panel, the US said. The US added that the EC claims lacked merit and that a panel would agree.
The DSB agreed to establish a panel. The following members requested to be third parties: Australia , Canada , Mexico , Chinese Taipei and China .
The EC first requested a panel on 25 January 2005 but the United States blocked it.
DS321: Canada — Continued suspension of obligations in the EC — Hormones dispute
The EC said that it requested a panel for a second time because Canada continued to act against its WTO obligations.
Canada said that although the EC now considered itself to have complied, there was no multilateral confirmation of this. The EC's position that its unilateral determination and declaration of compliance overrode and annulled Canada 's multilateral authorisation was legally untenable, Canada said.
The DSB agreed to establish a panel. The following members requested to be third parties: Australia , United States , Mexico , Chinese Taipei and China .
The EC first requested a panel on 25 January 2005 but Canada blocked it.