Disputes Brought Against the United States

Disputes Brought Against the United States in 2013

United States views on international law [1] in relation to Disputes Brought Against the United States: (1) Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing, and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products (WT/DS381)

As discussed in this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2011) at 375-76, the WTO panel in this case issued its report in 2011. Both Mexico and the United States appealed and the Appellate Body issued its report in 2012. See this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2012) at 378-79. The 2013 Annual Report at 86 describes subsequent steps in 2013 in response to the recommendations and rulings of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (“DSB”):

On July 23, 2013, the Unites States announced that it had fully complied with the DSB's recommendations and rulings through a final rule of the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that came into effect on July 13, 2013. The final rule enhances the documentary requirements for certifying that no dolphins were killed or seriously injured in the sets or other gear deployments in which the tuna were caught outside the Eastern Tropical Pacific.

On November 25, 2013, Mexico requested that the DSB establish a panel to determine whether the U.S. dolphin-safe labeling provisions, as amended by the new final rule, are consistent with U.S. WTO obligations. Mexico's request makes claims under Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the TBT Agreement and Articles III:4 and XXIII:1(b) of the GATT 1994.

Some Aspects of Disputes Brought Against the United States

(2) Zeroing

As discussed in this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2011) at 377, a DSB panel report issued in 2011 in Antidumping Administrative Reviews and Other Measures Related to Imports of Certain Orange Juice from Brazil (DS382) found the use of “zeroing” in antidumping reviews by the United States to be inconsistent with WTO obligations. As reported in the 2013 Annual Report at 87, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued notices in the Federal Register in 2012 modifying its procedures in accordance with DSB recommendations regarding “zeroing” and revoked the antidumping duty on the orange juice products from Brazil at issue in this dispute. Accordingly, the United States and Brazil notified the DSB that on February 14, 2013, they had reached a settlement in the dispute.

Developments

The United States also informed the DSB in 2013 of U.S. compliance with DSB recommendations in another dispute concerning zeroing: Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Shrimp and Diamond Sawblades from China (DS422). See 2013 Annual Report at 93.

Details

(3) Certain Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) Requirements (Canada) (DS384) and (Mexico) (DS386)

As discussed in this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2011) at 376-77, a panel issued its report on disputes brought separately by Canada and Mexico challenging U.S. country of origin labeling (“COOL”) requirements. The Appellate Body issued its findings in 2012. See this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2012) at 379. The 2013 Annual Report at 88-89 describes implementation of the DSB's recommendations:

On May 24, 2013, the United States announced that it had fully implemented the DSB's recommendations and rulings through a new final rule issued by USDA on May 23, 2013. The final rule modifies the labeling provisions for muscle cut covered commodities to require the origin designations to include information about where each of the production steps (i.e., born, raised, slaughtered) occurred and removes the allowance for commingling.

On September 25, 2013, at the request of both Canada and Mexico, the DSB referred the matter to a compliance panel to determine whether the amendments made by the United States are consistent with WTO obligations.

More

(4) Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes (DS406)

See this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2012) at 381 for a discussion of the Appellate Body's findings in this case. As discussed in the 2013 Annual Report at 91-92, Indonesia continued to challenge U.S. actions with regard to the sale of clove cigarettes in 2013:

At the DSB meeting on July 23, 2013, the United States stated that it had fully implemented the DSB's recommendations and rulings…, but Indonesia did not agree. On August 12, 2013, Indonesia filed a request for authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations under Article 22.2 of the DSU. In a communication dated August 22, 2013, the United States objected to Indonesia's request, thereby referring the matter to arbitration. The Arbitrator is composed of the members of the original Panel: Mr. Ronald Saborío, Chair; and Mr. Ichiro Araki and Mr. Hugo Cayrús (Uruguay), members. The Arbitrator is expected to issue its award in 2014.

Resources

Notes

1. Disputes Brought Against the United States in the Digest of United States Practice in International Law