European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Argentina

 

Short title:	EU — Biodiesel (Argentina)
Complainant:	Argentina
Respondent:	European Union
Third Parties (original proceedings):	Australia; China; Malaysia; Norway; Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of; Turkey; United States; Colombia; Indonesia; Mexico
Agreements cited: (as cited in request for consultations)	Art. 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.2, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 6.2, 6.4, 6.5, 6.5.1, 9.3, 18.4  Anti-dumping Art. VI:2  GATT 1994 Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization
Agreements cited: (as cited in panel request)	Art. 2.2  Anti-dumping Art. VI:1  GATT 1994 Art. 2.2.1.1, 9.3, 2, 18.4  Anti-dumping Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization Art. 2.1, 2.2.2(iii), 2.4  Anti-dumping Art. VI:2  GATT 1994 Art. 3.1, 3.4, 3.5, 1  Anti-dumping Art. VI  GATT 1994
Consultations requested:	19 December 2013
Panel requested:	13 March 2014
Panel established:	25 April 2014
Panel composed:	23 June 2014
Panel report circulated:	29 March 2016 (adopted on 26 October 2016 )
Appellate Body report circulated:	6 October 2016 (adopted on 26 October 2016)

 

Consultations

 

Complaint by Argentina.

 

On 19 December 2013, Argentina requested consultations with the European Union regarding (a) provisional and definitive anti-dumping measures imposed on biodiesel originating in, inter alia, Argentina, as well as the investigation underlying the measures; and, (b) a provision in Council Regulation (EC) 1225/2009 of November 2009, which refers to the adjustment or establishment of costs associated with the production and sale of products under investigation in the determination of dumping margins.

 

Argentina claimed that the measures were inconsistent with:

 

- Articles 1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.2, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 6.2, 6.4, 6.5, 6.5.1, 9.3, 18 and 18.4 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement;

 

- Article VI of the GATT 1994; and

 

- Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement.

 

On 9 January 2014, the Russian Federation requested to join the consultations. On 15 January 2014, Indonesia requested to join the consultations. Subsequently, the European Union informed the DSB that it had accepted the request of Indonesia to join the consultations.

 

On 13 March 2014, Argentina requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 26 March 2014, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.

 

Panel and Appellate Body proceedings

 

At its meeting on 25 April 2014, the DSB established a panel. Australia, China, Malaysia, Norway, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United States reserved their third-party rights. Subsequently, Colombia, Indonesia and Mexico reserved their third-party rights.

 

On 13 June 2014, Argentina requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 23 June 2014, the Director-General composed the panel. On 10 December 2014, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that the start of the proceedings was delayed owing to the unavailability of panelists and a lack of available experienced Secretariat lawyers, and that the panel expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of 2015.

 

Following the resigniaton of one of the members of the panel on 15 February 2015, the Director‑General appointed a new member of the panel on 18 February 2015.

 

On 18 December 2015, the Chair of the Panel informed the DSB that, due to the complexity of the legal and factual issues arising in the dispute, the Panel now expected to issue its final report to the parties by the end of February 2016.

 

On 29 March 2016, the panel report was circulated to Members.

 

On 20 May 2016, the European Union notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On 25 May 2016, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to cross-appeal.

 

On 19 July 2016, upon expiry of the 60-day period provided for in Article 17.5 of the DSU, the Appellate Body informed the DSB that the circulation date of the Appellate Body report in this appeal will be communicated to the participants and third participants shortly after the oral hearing, in the light of scheduling of parallel appeals, the number and complexity of the issues raised in this and concurrent appellate proceedings, the availability of translation services, and shortage of staff in the Appellate Body Secretariat. On 9 August 2016, the Appellate Body informed the DSB that it expected to circulate its report in this appeal no later than 6 October 2016.

 

On 6 October 2016, the Appellate Body report was circulated to Members.

 

At its meeting on 26 October 2016, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report.

 

Reasonable period of time

 

At the DSB meeting on 23 November 2016, the European Union informed the DSB that, pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU, it intended to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in this dispute. On 9 December 2016, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB that they had agreed that the reasonable period of time to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings would be 9 months and 15 days. Accordingly, the reasonable period of time is set to expire on 10 August 2017. One day earlier, on 9 August 2017, the European Union and Argentina informed the DSB that they had agreed that the reasonable period of time is to expire on 28 September 2017. In that same communication, the parties also notified the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (sequencing agreement).

 

Implementation of adopted reports

 

At the DSB meeting on 23 October 2017, the European Union informed the DSB that the adoption of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1578 (amending the WTO-inconsistent anti-dumping measures on biodiesel) ensured the full implementation of the DSB recommendations and rulings in this dispute. Argentina welcomed the EU status report and reiterated its satisfaction with the adoption of the Implementing Regulation. Argentina further indicated that it was closely monitoring the appeal brought to the European Court of Justice by the EU Commission against the decision of the EU General Court annulling the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of biodiesel of November 2013. In addition, Argentina reiterated its serious concern about the European Biodiesel Board's announcement of its intention to submit a petition to the EU Commission to initiate a subsidy investigation against Argentinean biodiesel imports.