WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/DSB/21
27 November 2000
(00-5056)
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BODY
Annual Report (2000)1
The present report has been prepared in pursuance of the Procedures for an Annual Overview
of WTO Activities and for Reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105), and sets out the actions taken by
the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in the period since its previous annual report.2
In carrying out its task, the DSB has held 23 meetings since the period covered by the
previous report.  The minutes of these meetings, which remain the record of the DSB's work, arecontained in documents WT /DSB/M/70 – WT/DSB/M/92.
3
The following subjects are included in the report:
Page
1. Election of Chairperson...................................................................................................... ......4
2. Review of the DSU ............................................................................................................ ........5
3. Appointment of Appellate Body members .............................................................................5
4. Term of appointment of Appellate Body members................................................................7
5. Progress report on informal consultations on the question of harmonization of
the terms of office of Appellate Body members and selection processes for future
appointments to the Appellate Body .......................................................................................7
6. Adoption of the 2000 draft Annual Report of the DSB .........................................................77. Indicative list of governmental and non-governmental panelists.........................................7
8. Chairmanship of a possible DSB meeting in the second half of August ..............................8
9. Recourse to dispute settlement procedures ............................................................................8
(a) Argen tina ................................................................................................................... .................8
(i) Definitive anti-dumping measures on carton-board imports from Germany and
definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of ceramic floor tiles from Italy..........................8
(ii) Definitive anti-dumping measures on import s of ceramic floor ti les from Italy.........................8
(iii) Safeguard measures on imports of footwear ..............................................................................9
                                                     
1 The Overview of the State of Play of WTO Disputes since 1 January 1995 to 31 October 2000
prepared by the Secretariat on its own responsibility is included, for practical purposes, in an Addendum to this
report.
2 WT/DSB/16, Corr.1 and Add.1.
3 The present report includes meetings of the DSB covering the period from 27 October 1999 to
17 November 2000.WT/DSB/21
Page 2
(iv) Transitional safeguard measures on certain imports of woven fabrics of cotton and
cotton mixtures originating in Brazil........................................................................................10
(b) Austr alia................................................................................................................... .................10
(i) Measures affecting importation of salmon – Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by
Canada......................................................................................................................... .............10
(ii) Subsidies provided to producers and exporters of automotive leather – Recourse to
Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States............................................................................11
(c) Brazil...................................................................................................................... ...................11
(i) Export financing programme for aircraft .................................................................................11
(ii) Export financing programme for aircraft – Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the
DSU............................................................................................................................ ...............12
(d) Canada ...................................................................................................................... ................12
(i) Certain measures affecti ng the automotive industry.................................................................12
(ii) Measures affecting the importation of milk and the exportation of dairy products..................13
(iii) Measures affecting the ex port of civili an aircraft.....................................................................13
(iv) Measures affecting the export of civilian aircraft – Recourse by Brazil to Article 21.5
of the DSU..................................................................................................................... ............14
(v) Patent protection of pha rmaceutical products..........................................................................14
(vi) Term of pate nt protection .................................................................................................. .......15
(e) Ch ile....................................................................................................................... ...................15
(i) Taxes on alcoholic beverages ................................................................................................ ...15
(ii) Measures affecting the transit  and importation of  swordfish ...................................................16
(f) Colo mbia.................................................................................................................... ...............16
(i) Safeguard measure on imports of plain polyester filaments from Thailand.............................16
(g) European Commun ities........................................................................................................ .....16
(i) Anti-dumping duties on imports of cotton-type bed linen from India .......................................16
(ii) Regime for the importation, sa le and distribution of bananas .................................................16
(h) Guate mala ................................................................................................................... ..............17
(i) Definitive anti-dumping measures on grey Portland cement from Mexico ..............................17
(i) India ....................................................................................................................... ...................17
(i) Measures affecting trade and investme nt in the motor vehicle sector......................................17
(ii) Measures affecting expor t of certain commodities ...................................................................18
(iii) Measures affecting the automotiv e sector.................................................................................1 8
(j) Korea....................................................................................................................... ..................19
(i) Definitive safeguard measure on im ports of certain dairy products ........................................19
(ii) Measures affecting go vernment procurement...........................................................................19
(k) Mexico ...................................................................................................................... ................20WT/DSB/21
Page 3
(i) Anti-dumping investigation of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) from the United
States......................................................................................................................... ................20
(l) Nicar agua................................................................................................................... ...............21
(i) Measures affecting imports from Honduras and Colombia......................................................21
(m) Phili ppines ................................................................................................................. ...............21
(i) Measures affecting trade and investme nt in the motor vehicle sector......................................21
(n) Thailand .................................................................................................................... ................22
(i) Anti-dumping duties on angles, shapes and sections of iron or non-alloy steel and
H-beams from Poland............................................................................................................ ...22
(o) Turkey...................................................................................................................... .................22
(i) Restrictions on imports of textile and clothing products ..........................................................22
(p) United States............................................................................................................... ..............22
(i) Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 .................................................................................................... ....22
(ii) Anti-dumping duty on dynamic random access memory semiconductors (DRAMS) of
one megabit or above from Korea ............................................................................................23
(iii) Anti-dumping measures on certain hot -rolled steel products from Japan................................23
(iv) Anti-dumping measures on stainless steel plate in coils and stainless steel sheet and
strip from Korea............................................................................................................... .........24
(v) Definitive safeguard measures on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe
from Korea..................................................................................................................... ...........24
(vi) Import prohibition of certai n shrimp and shrimp products ......................................................25
(vii) Imposition of countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon
steel products originating in the United Kingdom....................................................................25
(viii) Measures treating export re straints as subsidies......................................................................26
(ix) Safeguard measure on imports of lamb meat from New Zealand and Australia......................26
(x) Section 110(5) of th e US Copyright Act....................................................................................26
(xi) Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998....................................................................27(xii) Sections 301-310 of the Trade Act of 1974...............................................................................27
(xiii) Tax treatment for "Forei gn Sales Corporations" .....................................................................28
(xiv) Transitional safeguard measure on combed cotton yarn from Pakistan ..................................29
10. Surveillance of implementation of recommendations adopted by the DSB.......................29
(a) Canada ...................................................................................................................... ................29
(i) Measures affecting the importation of milk and the exportation of dairy products..................29
(b) European Commun ities........................................................................................................ .....30
(i) Regime for the importation, sa le and distribution of bananas .................................................30
(c) India ....................................................................................................................... ...................32
(i) Quantitative restrictions on imports of agr icultural, textile and industrial products...............32WT/DSB/21
Page 4
(d) Japan ....................................................................................................................... ..................33
(i) Measures affecting ag ricultural products.................................................................................33
(e) Korea....................................................................................................................... ..................35
(i) Definitive safeguard measure on im ports of certain dairy products ........................................35
(ii) Taxes on alc oholic beverages ............................................................................................... ....35
(f) Turk ey...................................................................................................................... .................35
(i) Restrictions on imports of textile and clothing products ..........................................................35
(g) United States............................................................................................................... ..............36
(i) Anti-dumping duty on dynamic random access memory semiconductors (DRAMS) of
one megabit or above from Korea ............................................................................................36
(ii) Import prohibition of certai n shrimp and shrimp products ......................................................36
11. Other matters ............................................................................................................... ...........37
(a) United States – Measures affectin g textiles and apparel products............................................37
(b) Indonesia – Certain measures affe cting the automob ile industry .............................................37
(c) Withdrawal of an appeal under Rule 30 of the Working Procedures for Appellate
Review ......................................................................................................................... .............37
(d) Questions addressed by delegations to the Chairman of the DSB upon the adoption of
the Reports of the Appellate Body and the Panel on "United States – Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel
Products Originating in the United Kingdom" at the DSB meeting on 7 June 2000................37
(e) Third-party participation in GATT Article XXII consultations in relation to the case
on "United States – Section 306 of the Trad e Act of 1974 and Amendments Thereto"...........38
(f) Information provided by the EC with regard to the agreed procedures in the follow-up
to the Foreign Sales Corpor ations (FSC) dispute......................................................................38
(g) Special meeting of the General Council on 22 November 2000 to discuss the
communication from the Appellate Body to the Chairman of the DSB on "European
Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos – Containing Products"..............38
(h) Consultations requested by Brazil with the European Communities on its measures
affecting sol uble co ffee....................................................................................................... ......38
1. Election of Chairperson (WT/DSB/M/76)
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB elected Mr. Stuart Harbinson (Hong Kong,
China) as Chairman by acclamation.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, India, Thailand (on behalf
of the ASEAN Members), Japan, Costa Rica (on beha lf of Latin American and Caribbean Members),
the outgoing Chairman and the incoming Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.WT/DSB/21
Page 5
2. Review of the DSU (WT/DSB/M/70, 72)
At the DSB meeting on 27 October 1999, Mr. Suzuki (Japan), who had chaired informal
discussions on the DSU review reported, in his personal capacity, on the progress made thus far.
The representatives of Mexico, European Communities, Malaysia, Egypt, Venezuela,
Colombia, Canada, Costa Rica, Turkey, Brazil, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand, Korea, India,
Ecuador, Guatemala, Argentina, Hungary, Indonesi a, Thailand, Australia, United States, Philippines
and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its resumed
meeting on 3 November 1999.
Upon resumption of the DSB meeting on 3 November 1999, the Chairman presented his
statement, prepared on the basis of the discussion held on 27 October 1999, to be read out, on his own
responsibility, at the meeting of the General Council on 4 November 1999.
The representatives of the Philippines, United States, Malaysia, Mexico, Venezuela, Ecuador,
Indonesia, Egypt and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.At the DSB meeting on 9 December 1999, the representative of Uruguay recalled that no
decision on the DSU review had been taken at the Third Session of the Ministerial Conference in
Seattle.  He therefore believed that it would be appropriate for the General Council to take a decision
to continue with the current DSU, in accordance with the 1994 Ministerial Decision.
The representatives of Uruguay, United States, Philippines and the European Communities
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
3. Appointment of Appellate Body members (WT/DSB/M/70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 82)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the Chairman proposed that the DSB
agree:  (i) to renew the terms of Messrs. Bacchus and Beeby for a final term of four years;  (ii) to
commence a process to ensure the rapid replacement of two Appellate Body members who had
expressed their desire to leave, following the process used in 1995 to select the original seven
Appellate Body members, which would involve nominations by WTO Members by
17 December 1999, and the establishment of a Selection Committee composed of theDirector-General together with the 1999 Chairs of the General Council, the DSB, and the Councils for
Trade in Goods, Services and TRIPS, with a view to a recommendation being made to the DSB for a
decision at its meeting in March 2000;  and (iii) to extend the terms of Messrs. El-Naggar and
Matsushita until the end of March 2000.
The representatives of Brazil, India, Australia, Mexico, Malaysia, Japan, Canada and the
Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to the proposal outlined by the Chairman.WT/DSB/21
Page 6
At the DSB meeting on 27 January 2000, the Chairman proposed that the deadline of
17 December 1999 for submission of candidates for the Appellate Body members be extended until
17 February 2000.
The representatives of Japan, Canada, United States, Slovenia and the Chairman spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to extend the deadline for submission of
candidates for the Appellate Body members until 17 February 2000.
At the DSB meeting on 11 February 2000, the Chairman informed the DSB that the Selection
Committee would start interviews of candidates in the week of 28 February 2000.
The DSB took note of the statement.
At the DSB meeting on 24 February 2000, the Chairman made a statement concerning the
selection process for the Appellate Body members.
The representative of Thailand spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.At the DSB meeting on 20 March 2000, the Chairman reported on the work of the Selection
Committee thus far.  He noted that it was the intention of the Committee to take a decision on this
matter before the next regular meeting of the DSB or at a special meeting to be convened for that
purpose shortly thereafter.
The DSB took note of the statement.At the DSB meeting on 7 April 2000, the Chairman read out a statement conveying the
Selection Committee's recommendations to appoint Messrs. Abi Saab and Ganesan as members of the
Appellate Body for four years from a date, to be fixed in the near future, on which their contracts
would commence.  He proposed that the DSB agree to the recommendations of the Selection
Committee.
The DSB so agreed.
The Chairman also proposed that the DSB authorize the Selection Committee to continue its
work in relation to the selection of an additiona l candidate to fill the vacancy left by the late
Mr. Beeby and that the DSB agree to invite Members wishing to submit or resubmit candidates forthis third vacancy to do so no later than 5 May 2000.
The DSB agreed to the Chairman's proposal.The representatives of Egypt, Japan, Philippines (on behalf of the ASEAN Members), Israel,
Poland (on behalf of CEFTA Members and Estonia and Latvia), European Communities, United
States, India, Mexico, Australia, Canada and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
At the DSB meeting on 25 May 2000, the Chairman read out the statement conveying the
Selection Committee's recommendation to appoint Mr. Taniguchi as a member of the Appellate Body
for the remainder of the late Mr. Beeby's term, that was, up to and including 10 December 2003.  He
proposed that the DSB agree to the recommendation of the Selection Committee.WT/DSB/21
Page 7
The DSB so agreed.
The representatives of Japan, Australia, United States, Bulgaria, European Communities and
the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
4. Term of appointment of Appellate Body members (WT/DSB/M/71)
At the DSB meeting on 19 November 1999, the representative of India introduced his
country’s proposal contained in document WT/DSB/W/117 with regard to the term of appointment of
Appellate Body members.
The representatives of India, European Communities, Canada, Norway, Mexico, Japan,
Switzerland, United States and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its future meeting.
5. Progress report on informal consultations on the question of harmonization of the terms
of office of Appellate Body members and selection processes for future appointments tothe Appellate Body (WT/DSB/M/82)
At the DSB on 25 May 2000, the Chairman reported on the consultations he had held on the
question of harmonization of the terms of office of Appellate Body members and selection processes
for future appointments to the Appellate Body.
The DSB took note of the statement.
6. Adoption of the 2000 draft Annual Report of the DSB (WT/DSB/M/92)
At the DSB meeting on 17 November 2000, the Chairman proposed that the DSB adopt its
2000 draft Annual Report contained in WT/DSB/W /147 and Add.1 and Add.1/Corr.1 and authorize
the Secretariat to update the Report under its own responsibility in order to include the actions takenby the DSB at the present meeting.  He said that the updated Annual Report would be submitted for
consideration by the General Council at its meeting on 7 and 8 December 2000.
The representatives of Mexico and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the draft Annual Report contained in
WT/DSB/W/147 and Add.1 and Add.1/Corr.1.
7. Indicative list of governmental and non- governmental panelists (WT/DSB/M/70, 76, 77,
80, 89, 91)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB approved the names contained
in document WT/DSB/W/114 proposed for inclusion on the indicative list in accordance with
Article 8.4 of the DSU.WT/DSB/21
Page 8
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB approved the names contained in documents
WT/DSB/W/120 and WT/DSB/W/123 proposed for incl usion on the indicative list in accordance with
Article 8.4 of the DSU.
At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB approved the names contained in document
WT/DSB/W/126 and Corr.1 proposed for inclusi on on the indicative list in accordance with
Article 8.4 of the DSU.
At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB approved the names contained in document
WT/DSB/W/130 proposed for inclusion on the indicativ e list in accordance with Article 8.4 of the
DSU.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB approved the names contained in document
WT/DSB/W/142 proposed for inclusion on the indicativ e list in accordance with Article 8.4 of the
DSU.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB approved the name contained in document
WT/DSB/W/145 proposed for inclusion on the indicativ e list in accordance with Article 8.4 of the
DSU.
8. Chairmanship of a possible DSB meeting in the second half of August (WT/DSB/M/86)
At the DSB meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB agreed to appoint the Chairman of the Council
for Trade in Goods, Mr. Pérez de Castillo (U ruguay) to chair any DSB meeting that might be
required, for reasons of urgency, during the second half of August.
The representative of Panama and the Chairman spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
9. Recourse to dispute settlement procedures
(a) Argentina
(i) Definitive anti-dumping measures on carton-boa rd imports from Germany and definitive anti-
dumping measures on imports of ceramic floor tiles from Italy (WT/DSB/M/89)
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European
Communities for the establishment of a panel to ex amine its complaint with regard to Argentina's
definitive anti-dumping measures on carton-board imports from Germany and on imports of ceramic
floor tiles from Italy (WT/DS189/2)
The representatives of the European Communities and Argentina spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
(ii) Definitive anti-dumping measures on import s of ceramic floor tiles from Italy
(WT/DSB/M/92)
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European
Communities for the establishment of a panel to ex amine its complaint with regard to Argentina'sWT/DSB/21
Page 9
anti-dumping measures on imports of ceramic floor tiles from Italy (WT/DS189/3).  The Chairman
drew attention to the fact that the EC's request had already been considered by the DSB on
26 September 2000 as part of the EC's broader complaint contained in WT/DS189/2.
The representatives of the European Communities and Argentina spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Japan, Turkey and the United States reserved their third-party rights to
participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(iii) Safeguard measures on imports of  footwear (WT/DSB/M/73, 75, 76, 77)
In July 1998
4, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the European
Communities with regard to Argentina’s safeguard measures on imports of footwear.  In
September 1999, Argentina had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and
legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 12 January 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained
in WT/DS121/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS121/R pertaining to the complaint by
the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, Argentina, Indonesia, Brazil, United
States and Uruguay spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report in
WT/DS121/AB/R and the Panel Report in WT/DS121/ R as modified by the Appellate Body Report.
At the DSB meeting on 11 February 2000, the representative of Argentina informed the DSB
of his country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.
The representatives of Argentina, United States, European Communities and Indonesia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Argentina regarding
its intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
At the DSB meeting on 24 February 2000, the representative of the United States expressed
concern about Argentina's intention regarding it s safeguard measures on imports of footwear.
The representatives of the United States, Argentina, European Communities and Indonesia
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.At the DSB meeting on 20 March 2000, the representative of the European Communities
expressed concern about Argentina's lack of implementation in this case.
The representatives of the European Communities, Indonesia and Argentina spoke.
                                                     
4 WT/DSB/M/47.WT/DSB/21
Page 10
The DSB took note of the statements.
(iv) Transitional safeguard measures on certain imports of woven fabrics of cotton and cotton
mixtures originating in  Brazil (WT/DSB/M/76, 77)
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB considered a request by Brazil for the
establishment of a panel to examine its complain t with regard to transitional safeguard measures
imposed by Argentina on certain imports of woven fabrics of cotton and cotton mixtures originating
in Brazil (WT/DS190/1).
The representatives of Brazil, Argentina and Pakistan spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At the DSB meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Brazil and Argentina spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Pakistan, Paraguay and the United States reserved their third-party
rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(b) Australia
(i) Measures affecting importation of salmon – Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Canada
(WT/DSB/M/77, 80)
In July 19995, the DSB had agreed, in accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to the
original Panel a request by Canada for determination of consistency of the implementation measures
in this case.
At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS18/RW pertaining to this matter.
The representatives of Canada, Australia, United States, European Communities and Norway
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS18/RW.
At the DSB meeting on 18 May 2000, Canada and Australia announced that they had reached
an agreement on this matter.
The representatives of Canada, Australia, United States and Norway spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
                                                     
5 WT/DSB/M/66.WT/DSB/21
Page 11
(ii) Subsidies provided to producers and exporters of automotive leather – Recourse to
Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States (WT/DSB/M/75)
In October 19996, the DSB had agreed, in accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to
the original Panel the matter raised by the United States concerning the measures taken by Australia
to comply with the DSB's recommendations in this case.
At its meeting on 11 February 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS126/RW and Corr.1 pert aining to this matter.
The representatives of the United States, Australia, Canada, Brazil, Japan, European
Communities, Malaysia and Hong Kong, China spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS126/RW and Corr.1.
(c) Brazil
(i) Export financing programme for aircraft (WT/DSB/M/71, 72, 81)
At the DSB meeting on 19 November 1999, the representative of Canada made a statement
concerning the implementation by Brazil of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS46).
The representatives of Canada and Brazil spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
At its meeting on 9 December 1999, the DSB considered a request by Canada under
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine Brazil's implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter (WT/DS46/13).
The representatives of Canada and Brazil spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to refer to the original Panel, pursuant to
Article 21.5 of the DSU, the matter raised by Canada in document WT/DS46/13.  It was agreed that
the Panel would have standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities and the United States reserved their third-
party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
7
At its meeting on 22 May 2000, the DSB considered a request by Canada for authorization to
take appropriate countermeasures pursuant to Article 4.10 of the SCM Agreement and Article 22.2 of
the DSU (WT/DS46/16).
The representatives of Canada, Brazil, European Communities, Uruguay, United States,
Malaysia, India, Argentina, Saint Lucia and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed that, as requested by Brazil pursuant to
Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement and Article 22.6 of the DSU, the matter be referred to arbitration
to determine whether the countermeasures requested by Canada in document WT/DS46/16 were
                                                     
6 WT/DSB/M/69.
7 After the meeting Australia reserved its third-part y rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.WT/DSB/21
Page 12
appropriate;  it being understood that no counte rmeasures would be sought pending the Appellate
Body Report and until after the Arbitration Report in the present case.
(ii) Export financing programme for aircraft – Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
(WT/DSB/M/87)
At its meeting on 4 August 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS46/AB/RW and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS46/RW reconvened in accordance with
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine Brazil's implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter.
The representatives of Canada, Brazil and the European Communities spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS46/AB/RW and the Panel Repor t contained in WT/DS46/RW as modified by the Appellate
Body Report.
(d) Canada
(i) Certain measures affecting the automotive industry (WT/DSB/M/84, 86)
In February 19998, the DSB had established a single panel to examine the complaints by
Japan and the European Communities with regard to certain aspects of Canada's automotive trade
regime.  In March 2000, Canada had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law
and legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS139/AB/R – WT/DS142/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS139/R –
WT/DS142/R pertaining to the complaints by Japan and the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, Japan, Canada, the Philippines and Hong
Kong, China spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS139/AB/R – WT/DS142/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS139/R –
WT/DS142/R as modified by  the Appellate Body Report.
At the DSB meeting on 27 July 2000, the representative of Canada informed the DSB of his
country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.  He said that Canada was consulting with the EC and Japan on a
reasonable period of time for implementation.
The representatives of Canada, European Communities and Japan spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Canada regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
                                                     
8 WT/DSB/M/54.WT/DSB/21
Page 13
(ii) Measures affecting the importation of milk and the exportation of dairy products
(WT/DSB/M/70, 71, 74)
In March 19989, the DSB had established a panel to examine this matter at the request of the
United States.  On the same date, the DSB had established a panel to examine the same matter at the
request of New Zealand.  Furthermore, the DSB agreed that a single panel examine both complaints.In July 1999, Canada had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal
interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered the Appellate Body
Report contained in WT/DS103/AB/R – WT/DS1 13/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS103/R – WT/DS113/R pertaini ng to the complaint by the United States and New Zealand.
The representatives of the United States, New Zealand, Canada and Australia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS103/AB/R – WT/DS113/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS103/R –
WT/DS113/R as modified by  the Appellate Body Report.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the representative of Canada informed the DSB of his
country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.  He said that Canada would continue to consult with the United
States and New Zealand on a reasonable period of time for implementation.
The representatives of Canada, United States and New Zealand spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Canada regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
At the DSB meeting on 27 January 2000, the representative of Canada informed the DSB that
his country had reached an agreement with New Zealand and the United States on a reasonable period
of time for implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
The representatives of Canada, New Zealand and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(iii) Measures affecting the export of civilian aircraft (WT/DSB/M/71, 72)
At the DSB meeting on 19 November 1999, the representative of Brazil made a statement
concerning the implementation by Canada of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS70).
The representatives of Brazil and Canada spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
At its meeting on 9 December 1999, the DSB considered a request by Brazil under
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine Canada's im plementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter (WT/DS70/9).
The representatives of Brazil, Canada and India spoke.
                                                     
9 WT/DSB/M/44.WT/DSB/21
Page 14
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to refer to the original Panel, pursuant to
Article 21.5 of the DSU, the matter raised by Brazil in document WT/DS70/9.  It was agreed that the
Panel would have standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities and the United States reserved their third-
party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.10
(iv) Measures affecting the export of civilian aircraft – Recourse by Brazil to Article 21.5 of the
DSU (WT/DSB/M/87)
At its meeting on 4 August 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS70/AB/RW and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS70/RW reconvened in accordance with
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine Canada's implementation with the DSB's recommendations onthis matter.
The representatives of Canada, Brazil and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report in
WT/DS70/AB/RW and the Panel Report in WT/DS70/RW  as modified by the Appellate Body Report.
(v) Patent protection of pharmaceutical products (WT/DSB/M/78, 79, 91)
In February 1999
11, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the
European Communities and their member States with regard to certain aspects of Canada's patentlaws and regulations.
At its meeting on 7 April 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS114/R pertaining to the complaint by the European Communities and their member States.
The representatives of Canada, European Communities, Switzerland, India and Malaysia
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS114/R.
At its meeting on 25 April 2000, the representative of Canada informed the DSB of his
country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations, pursuant to
Article 21.3 of the DSU.  She said that Canada would require a reasonable period of time in order to
comply with the DSB's recommendations.
The representatives of Canada and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Canada regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
At the DSB meeting on 23 October 2000, the representative of Canada provided information
regarding his country's implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter.
The DSB took note of the statement.
                                                     
10 After the meeting Australia reserved its third-part y rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
11 WT/DSB/M/54.WT/DSB/21
Page 15
(vi) Term of patent protection (WT/DSB/M/90, 91)
In September 199912, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the United
States with regard to the grant of patent terms in Canada.  In June 2000, Canada had notified the DSB
of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 12 October 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report in
WT/DS170/AB/R and the Panel Repo rt in WT/DS170/R, pertaining to the complaint by the United
States.
The representatives of Canada, United States and Argentina spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS170/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in  WT/DS170/R as upheld by the Appellate Body
Report.
At the DSB meeting on 23 October 2000, the representative of Canada informed the DSB of
his country's intentions in respect of implemen tation of the DSB's recommendations, pursuant to
Article 21.3 of the DSU.  He said that Canada would require a reasonable period of time for
implementation.
The representatives of Canada and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Canada regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
(e) Chile
(i) Taxes on alcoholic beverages (WT/DSB/M/73,75)
In March 199813, the DSB had established a Panel to examine the complaint by the European
Communities with regard to Chile's tax regime on alcoholic beverages.  In September 1999, Chile had
notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by
the Panel.
At its meeting on 12 January 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained
in WT/DS87/AB/R – WT/DS110/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS87/R –
WT/DS110/R pertaining to the complaint by the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, Chile and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS87/AB/R – WT/DS110/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS87/R – WT/DS110/R
as modified by the Appellate Body Report.
At the DSB meeting on 11 February 2000, the representative of Chile informed the DSB of
his country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.  He said that Chile would need a reasonable period of time for
implementation.
                                                     
12 WT/DSB/M/68.
13 WT/DSB/M/44.WT/DSB/21
Page 16
The representatives of Chile, European Communities and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Chile regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
(ii) Measures affecting the transit and im portation of swordfish (WT/DSB/M/92)
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European
Communities for the establishment of a panel to examine its complaint with regard to Chile's
measures affecting the transit and importation of swordfish (WT/DS193/2).
The representatives of the European Communities and Chile spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
(f) Colombia
(i) Safeguard measure on imports of plain polyes ter filaments from Thailand (WT/DSB/M/70)
At the DSB meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, Thailand sought confirmation
from Colombia as to whether its safeguard measure had expired.  Following Colombia's confirmation
that the measure had expired and that it would not be extended, Thailand requested a withdrawal of
the panel request (WT/DS181/1).
The representatives of Thailand, Colombia and the Chairman spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed that Thailand's request for a panel be
withdrawn from the agenda.
(g) European Communities
(i) Anti-dumping duties on imports of cotton- type bed linen from India (WT/DSB/M/70)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered a request by India
for the establishment of a panel to examine its comp laint with regard to the EC anti-dumping duties
imposed on imports of cotton-type bed linen from India (WT/DS141/3).
The representatives of India and the European Communities spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Egypt, Japan and the United States reserved their third-party rights to
participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(ii) Regime for the importation, sale and di stribution of bananas (WT/DSB/M/71, 78, 80)
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB considered a request by Ecuador under
Article 22.2 of the DSU for authorization to suspend the application to the EC and its member States
of tariff concessions or other related obligations under the GATT 1994, TRIPS Agreement and theGATS (WT/DS27/52).WT/DSB/21
Page 17
The representatives of Ecuador, European Communities, Honduras, Guatemala, Saint Lucia,
Panama, Jamaica, Côte d'Ivoire and Malaysia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed that the matter be referred to arbitration in
accordance with Article 22.6 of the DSU.
At the DSB meeting on 7 April 2000, the representative of Ecuador made a statement
regarding his country's position on the result of the arbitration contained in WT/DS27/ARB/ECU,
which had been requested by the EC in response to Ecuador's request for suspension of concessions in
relation to the banana case.
The representatives of Ecuador, European Communities, Guatemala, Honduras, Saint Lucia,
United States and Panama spoke.
The DSB took not of the statements.At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB considered Ecuador's request under Article 22.7 of
the DSU (WT/DS27/54) for authorization from the DSB to suspend the application to the EC and its
member States of tariff concessions or other related obligations under the TRIPS Agreement, GATS
and the GATT 1994.
The representatives of Ecuador and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and pursuant to Ecuador's request under Article 22.7 of
the DSU, as revised in the light of the Arbitrators' decision, agreed to grant authorization to suspend
the application to the EC and its member States of tariff concessions or other related obligations
consistent with the Arbitrators' decisi on contained in document WT/DS27/ARB/ECU.
(h) Guatemala
(i) Definitive anti-dumping measures on grey Po rtland cement from Mexico (WT/DSB/M/92)
In September 1999
14, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by Mexico
with regard to Guatemala's definitive anti-dumping measures on grey Portland cement from Mexico.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS156/R pertaining to the complaint by Mexico.
The representatives of Mexico and Guatemala spoke.The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS156/R.
(i) India
(i) Measures affecting trade and investment in  the motor vehicle sector (WT/DSB/M/84, 86)
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered a request by the United States for the
establishment of a panel to examine India's measures affecting trade and investment in the motor
vehicle sector (WT/DS175/4).
                                                     
14 WT/DSB/M/68.WT/DSB/21
Page 18
The representatives of the United States, India, Philippines and Cuba spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of the United States, India, Malaysia, Cuba and the Philippines spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communitie s and Korea reserved their third-party rights
to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
15
(ii) Measures affecting export of ce rtain commodities (WT/DSB/M/91)
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European
Communities for the establishment of a panel to examine India's measures affecting export of certain
commodities (WT/DS120/2).
The representatives of the European Communities and India spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
(iii) Measures affecting the automotive sector (WTDSB/M/91, 92)
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European
Communities for the establishment of a panel to ex amine India's measures affecting the automotive
sector (WT/DS146/4).
The representatives of the European Communities, India, Pakistan and the Philippines spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of the European Communities, India and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and, in accordance with Article 9.1 of the DSU, agreed
that the Panel established on 27 July 2000 to examine the complaint by the United States in document
WT/DS175/4 should also examine the complain t by the European Communities in document
WT/DS146/4, provided that the rights which the parties to the dispute would have enjoyed had
separate panels examined the complaints are in no way impaired.  It was agreed that the Panel would
have standard terms of reference referring to both of the relevant documents.  As the composition of
the Panel in the parallel case between India and the United States was presently in the hands of the
Director-General, pursuant to Article 8.7 of the DSU, it was also agreed that the EC would be
included in the consultations on this matter.  The Chairman recalled that Japan and Korea had
reserved their third-party rights to participate in the Panel established to examine the complaint by the
United States.  Japan indicated that it wished to rese rve its third-party rights to participate in the Panel
established at the present meeting.
                                                     
15 After the meeting Japan reserved its third-party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.WT/DSB/21
Page 19
(j) Korea
(i) Definitive safeguard measure on imports of certain dairy products (WT/DSB/M/73, 75)
In July 199816, the DSB had agreed to establish a Panel to examine the complaint by the
European Communities with regard to a definitive safeguard measure imposed by Korea on imports
of certain dairy products.  In September 1999, Korea had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal
certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 12 January 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained
in WT/DS98/AB/R and the Panel Report containe d in WT/DS98/R and Corr.1 pertaining to the
complaint by the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities and Korea spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Boy Report in
WT/DS98/AB/R and the Panel Report in WT/DS98/ R and Corr.1 as modified by the Appellate Body
Report.
At the DSB meeting on 11 February 2000, the representative of Korea informed the DSB of
his country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.
The representatives of Korea, European Communities and Ecuador spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Korea regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
(ii) Measures affecting government procurement (WT/DSB/M/84)
In June 1999
17, the DSB had agreed to establish a panel to examine the complaint by the
United States with regard to Korea's measures affecting government procurement.
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS163/R pertaining to the complaint by the United States.
The representatives of Korea, United States, Philippines, India and Hong Kong, China and the
Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS163/R;  it being noted that the adoption was be ing agreed only by the parties to the Plurilateral
Trade Agreement at issue in this case.
                                                     
16 WT/DSB/M/47.
17 WT/DSB/M/64.WT/DSB/21
Page 20
(k) Mexico
(i) Anti-dumping investigation of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) from the United States
(WT/DSB/M/76, 77, 89, 91)
In November 199818, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the United
States with regard to Mexico's anti-dumping inves tigation of high-fructose corn syrup from the United
States.
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS132/R and Corr.1 pertaining to the complaint by the United States.
The representatives of the United States, Mexico and Turkey spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS132/R and Corr.1.
At the DSB meeting on 20 March 2000, the representative of Mexico informed the DSB of
his country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter,
pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.  He said that his country would require a reasonable period oftime in order to comply with the DSB's recommendations.
The representatives of Mexico and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by Mexico regarding its
intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
At the DSB meeting on 26 September 2000, the representative of the United States sought
information from Mexico on the status of its implementation in this case.
The representatives of the United States and Mexico spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered a request by the United States under
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine Mexico's implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter (WT/DS132/6).
The representatives of the United States and Mexico spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed, pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer
to the original Panel the matter raised by the Un ited States in document WT/DS132/6.  It was agreed
that the Panel would have standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities and Mauritius reserved their third-party
rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
19
                                                     
18 WT/DSB/M/51.
19 After the meeting Jamaica reserved its third-party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.WT/DSB/21
Page 21
(l) Nicaragua
(i) Measures affecting imports from Honduras and Colombia (WT/DSB/M/78, 80)
At its meeting on 7 April 2000, the DSB considered a request from Colombia for the
establishment of a panel to examine its complaint with regard to Nicaragua's measures affecting
imports from Honduras and Colombia (WT/DS188/2 and Corr.1).
The representatives of Colombia, Nicaragua and Honduras spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to his matter.At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Colombia, Nicaragua, United States, Japan, Canada, Honduras,
European Communities and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU.  With regard to the terms of reference, the DSB authorized the
Chairman to draw up the terms of reference of the panel in consultation with the parties to the dispute
subject to the provisions of Article 7.1 of the DSU.
The representatives of Canada, Costa Rica, European Communities and Honduras reserved
their third-party rights to partic ipate in the Panel's proceedings.
(m) Philippines
(i) Measures affecting trade and investment in  the motor vehicle sector (WT/DSB/M/91, 92)
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered a request by the United States for the
establishment of a panel to examine the Philippines' measures affecting trade and investment in the
motor vehicle sector (WT/DS195/3).
The representatives of the United States, Philippines, Japan, Malaysia, Argentina, Pakistan,
Mexico, Indonesia and Mauritius spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of the United States, Philippines, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Argentina,
Saint Lucia, Brazil, Malaysia, Japan, Colombia, Venezuela, Chile, Singapore, Indonesia, Jamaica,
Ecuador, European Communities, Hungary and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of India and Japan reserved their third-party rights to participate in the
Panel's proceedings.WT/DSB/21
Page 22
(n) Thailand
(i) Anti-dumping duties on angles, shapes and sections of iron or non-alloy steel and H-beams
from Poland (WT/DSB/M/70, 71)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered a request by Poland
for the establishment of a panel to examine its comp laint with regard to an anti-dumping investigation
initiated by Thailand concerning imports of angles, shapes and sections of iron or non-alloy steel and
H-beams from Poland (WT/DS122/2).
The representatives of Poland and Thailand spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Poland and Thailand spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities, Japan and the United States reserved their
third-party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(o) Turkey
(i) Restrictions on imports of textil e and clothing products (WT/DSB/M/71)
In March 199820, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by India with
regard to Turkey's restrictions on imports of a broad range of textile and clothing products.  In
July 1999, Turkey had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legalinterpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report
contained in WT/DS34/AB/R and the Panel Repor t contained in WT/DS34/R pertaining to the
complaint by India.
The representatives of India, Turkey, Australia and Hong Kong, China spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS34/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in  WT/DS34/R as modified by the Appellate Body
Report.
(p) United States
(i) Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 (WT/DSB/M/89, 91)
In February 1999
21, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the EC with
respect to the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916.  In July 199922, the DSB had established a panel to
                                                     
20 WT/DSB/M/43 and Corr.1.
21 WT/DSB/M/54.
22 WT/DSB/M/65.WT/DSB/21
Page 23
examine the complaint by Japan on the same matter.  In May 2000, the United States had notified the
DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the Panels.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report
contained in WT/DS136/AB/R – WT/DS162/AB/R and the Panel Re ports contained in WT/DS136/R
and WT/DS162/R pertaining to the complaints by the EC and Japan.  The Chairman drew attention to
the communication from Mexico in WT/DS162/8 containing its concerns about the way in which the
Panel Report pertaining to the complaint by Japan (WT/DS162/R) had been handled.
The representatives of the European Communities, Japan, United States, Mexico, India,
Australia and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and a dopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS136/AB/R – WT/DS162/AB/R and the Pane l Reports contained in WT/DS136/R and
WT/DS162/R as upheld by th e Appellate Body Report.
At the DSB meeting on 23 October 2000, the representative of the United States informed the
DSB of her country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter, pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU.  She said that the United States would require a
reasonable period of time for implementation.
The representatives of the United States, Japan and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by the United States
regarding its intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
(ii) Anti-dumping duty on dynamic random access memory semiconductors (DRAMS) of one
megabit or above from Korea (WT/DSB/M/76, 79)
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the representative of Korea made a statement concerning
the implementation by the United States of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS99).
The representatives of Korea and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.At its meeting on 25 April 2000, the DSB considered a request from Korea under Article 21.5
of the DSU to reconvene the original Panel to examine the US implementation of the DSB's
recommendations on this matter (WT/DS99/8).
The representatives of Korea and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to refer to the original Panel, pursuant to
Article 21.5 of the DSU, the matter raised by Korea in document WT/DS99/8.
The European Communities reserved its third-party rights to participate in the Panel's
proceedings.
(iii) Anti-dumping measures on certain hot-rolle d steel products from Japan (WT/DSB/M/76, 77)
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB considered a request by Japan for the
establishment of a panel to examine its complaint with regard to the US anti-dumping measures on
certain hot-rolled steel products from Japan (WT/DS184/2).WT/DSB/21
Page 24
The representatives of Japan and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Japan, United States and Brazil spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Canada, Chile, European Communities and Korea reserved their third-
party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
23
(iv) Anti-dumping measures on stainless steel plate in coils and stainless steel sheet and strip
from Korea (WT/DSB/M/70, 71, 79)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered a request by Korea
for the establishment of a panel to examine its co mplaint with regard to US definitive anti-dumping
duties on stainless steel plate in coils and stainless steel sheet and strip from Korea (WT/DS179/2).
The representatives of Korea and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Korea and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities and Japan reserved their third-party rights
to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(v) Definitive safeguard measures on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe from
Korea (WT/DSB/M/89, 91)
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered a request by Korea for the
establishment of a panel to examine US definitive safeguard measures on imports of circular welded
carbon quality line pipe from Korea (WT/DS202/4).
The representatives of Korea and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Korea, United States and the European Communities spoke.
                                                     
23 After the meeting Brazil reserved its third-party rights to participate in  the Panel's proceedings.WT/DSB/21
Page 25
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities, Canada, Japan and Mexico reserved their
third-party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.24
(vi) Import prohibition of certain shrimp  and shrimp products (WT/DSB/M/91)
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered a request by Malaysia under
Article 21.5 of the DSU to examine the US implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter (WT/DS58/17).
The representatives of Malaysia, United States, Thailand, India and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed, pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer
to the original Panel the matter raised by Malays ia in document WT/DS58/17.  It was agreed that the
Panel would have standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Canada, Ecuador, India, Japan, Mexico, Thailand and Hong Kong,
China reserved their third-party rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
25
(vii) Imposition of countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel
products originating in the United Kingdom (WT/DSB/M/83, 85 and Corr.1)
In February 199926, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the EC with
regard to the US countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel products
originating in the United Kingdom.  In January 2000, the EC had notified the DSB of its decision to
appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 7 June 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS138/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS138/R pertaining to the complaint by the
European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, Mexico, Canada, Japan,
Argentina, Hungary, India, Philippines, Brazil, Malaysia, Pakistan, Ecuador, Australia, Thailand and
Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report contained in
WT/DS138/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in  WT/DS138/R as upheld by the Appellate Body
Report.
At the DSB meeting on 5 July 2000, the representative of the United States informed the DSB
of her country's implementation of the DSB's recommendations in this case.
The representatives of the United States, European Communities and Brazil spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by the United States
with respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
                                                     
24 After the meeting Australia reserved its third-part y rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
25 After the meeting Australia, European Communities and Pakistan reserved their third-party rights to
participate in the Panel's proceedings.
26 WT/DSB/M/55 and Corr.1.WT/DSB/21
Page 26
(viii) Measures treating export restraints as subsidies (WT/DSB/M/87, 88)
At its meeting on 4 August 2000, the DSB considered a request by Canada for the
establishment of a panel to examine its complaint wi th regard to the United States' measures treating
an export restraint of a product as a subsidy to producers of other products made, using or
incorporating the restricted product if the domestic price of that product was affected by the restraint(WT/DS194/2).
The representatives of Canada and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 11 September 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Canada and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Australia, European Communities and India reserved their third-party
rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
(ix) Safeguard measure on imports of lamb meat from New Zealand and Australia
(WT/DSB/M/70, 71)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered a request by New
Zealand (WT/DS177/4) and Australia (WT/DS178/5) to examine their complaints with regard to
safeguard measures imposed by the United States on imports of lamb meat.
The representatives of New Zealand, Australia, United States and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of New Zealand, Australia and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a single panel pursuant to
Article 9 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Canada, European Communities, Iceland, and Japan reserved their
third-party rights to participate in the Panel's pro ceedings.  Australia reserved its third-party rights in
respect of New Zealand's complaint.  New Zealand reserved its third-party rights in respect of
Australia's complaint.
(x) Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act (WT/DSB/M/86, 88)
In May 1999
27, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the EC with
regard to Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act.
                                                     
27 WT/DSB/M/62.WT/DSB/21
Page 27
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS160/R pertaining to the complaint by the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, Philippines, Australia,
Switzerland, India, Mexico, Malaysia and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS160/R.
At the DSB meeting on 11 September 2000, the representative of the United States informed
the DSB of her country's intentions with regard to implementation of the DSB's recommendations on
this matter.  She said that the United States would need a reasonable period of time forimplementation.
The representatives of the United States, European Communities and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by the United States
regarding its intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.  The DSB also
noted that the question of a reasonable period of time would be a matter for further consideration by
the parties under Article 21.3(b) of the DSU.
(xi) Section 211 Omnibus Appropriatio ns Act of 1998 (WT/DSB/M/86, 89)
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered a request by the European Communities
and their member States for the establishment of a panel to examine their complaint in relation to US
Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998 (WT/DS176/2).
The representatives of the European Communities, United States and Cuba spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States and Cuba spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with
Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of Japan and Nicaragua reserved their third-party rights to participate in
the Panel's proceedings.28
(xii) Sections 301-310 of the Trade Act of 1974 (WT/DSB/M/74)
In March 199929, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the European
Communities with regard to Section 301-310 of the US Trade Act of 1974.
At its meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS152/R pertaining to the complaint by the European Communities.
                                                     
28 After the meeting Canada reserved its third-part y rights to participate in the Panel's proceedings.
29 WT/DSB/M/56.WT/DSB/21
Page 28
The representatives of the United States, European Communities, Japan, Brazil, Korea, Costa
Rica, Cuba, Thailand, Saint Lucia, Norway, Canada, Poland (on behalf of CEFTA Members and
Estonia and Latvia), Dominican Republic, Jamaica, India, Australia, Argentina, Egypt, Guatemala and
Hong Kong, China spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements a nd adopted the Panel Report contained in
WT/DS152/R.
(xiii) Tax treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" (WT/DSB/M/77, 78, 90, 92)
In September 199830, the DSB had established a panel to examine the complaint by the
European Communities with regard to US tax treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations".  In
November 1999, the United States had notified the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of lawand legal interpretations developed by the Panel.
At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB considered the Appellate Body Report contained
in WT/DS108/AB/R and the Panel Report contained in WT/DS108/R pertaining to the complaint by
the European Communities.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, Canada and Australia
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and adopted the Appellate Body Report in
WT/DS108/AB/R and the Panel Repo rt in WT/DS108/R as modified by the Appellate Body Report.
At the DSB meeting on 7 April 2000, the representative of the United States informed the
DSB of her country's intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this
matter.
The representatives of the United States and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and of the information provided by the United States
regarding its intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations.
At the DSB meeting on 12 October 2000, the representative of the United States requested the
DSB to modify the time-period for compliance (1 October 2000) in the FSC dispute so as to expire on
1 November 2000.
The representatives of the United States, European Communities, Japan and the Chairman
spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and, given that there was no opposition to the US
request, acceded to the request of the United States, as formulated in its letter of 29 September 2000
and circulated in document WT/DS108/11.
At the DSB meeting on 17 November 2000, the United States announced that on
15 November 2000, the US President had signed into law H.R. 4986, the FSC Repeal and
Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000.  The Un ited States considered that with the enactment
of this legislation, it had implemented the DSB's recommendations in the FSC case.  The EC stated
that the new legislation did not bring the United States into compliance with the DSB'srecommendations and that it would enter into Article 21.5 consultations with the United States on this
                                                     
30 WT/DSB/M/48.WT/DSB/21
Page 29
matter.  In order to protect its rights, the EC requested a special meeting of the DSB on 28 November
2000 to seek authorization to take appropriate countermeasures and to suspend concessions in
accordance with Article 4.10 of the SCM Agreement and Article 22.2 of the DSU.
The representatives of the United States and the European Communities spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
(xiv) Transitional safeguard measure on combed cotton yarn from Pakistan (WT/DSB/M/80, 84)
At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB considered a request by Pakistan for the
establishment of a panel to examine the US transitional safeguard measure on combed cotton yarn
from Pakistan (WT/DS192/1).
The representatives of Pakistan and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter.
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB again considered this matter.
The representatives of Pakistan and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to establish a panel in accordance with the
provisions of Article 6 of the DSU, with standard terms of reference.
The representatives of the European Communities and India reserved their third-party rights
to participate in the Panel’s proceedings.
10. Surveillance of implementation of recommendations adopted by the DSB
Matters considered by the DSB under this item are included on the agenda pursuant to
Article 21.6 of the DSU which provides that:  "U nless the DSB decides otherwise, the issue of
implementation of the recommendations or rulings shall be placed on the agenda of the DSB meeting
after six months following the date of establishment of the reasonable time-period pursuant to
paragraph 3 and shall remain on the DSB's agenda until the issue is resolved.  At least 10 days prior toeach such DSB meeting, the Member concerned shall provide the DSB with a status report in writing
of its progress in the implementation of the recommendations or rulings."
(a) Canada
(i) Measures affecting the importation of milk and the exportation of dairy products
(WT/DSBM/84, 86, 89, 91, 92)
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Canada on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS103/12 –
WT/DS113/12).
The representatives of Canada, United States and New Zealand spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.WT/DSB/21
Page 30
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Canada on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS103/12/Add.1 –
WT/DS113/12/Add.1).
The representatives of Canada, New Zealand and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Canada on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS103/12/Add.2 –
WT/DS113/12/Add.2).
The representatives of Canada, New Zealand and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Canada on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS103/12/Add.3 –
WT/DS113/12/Add.3).
The representatives of Canada, New Zealand and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Canada on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS103/12/Add.4 –
WT/DS113/12/Add.4).
The representatives of Canada, New Zealand and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
(b) European Communities
(i) Regime for the importation, sale and distri bution of bananas (WT/DSB/M/70, 71, 74, 76, 77,
78, 80, 84, 86, 89, 91, 92)
At the its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered the status report
by the EC contained in WT/DS27/51/Add.2.
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, United States, Mexico,
Honduras, Guatemala, Colombia and Panama spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.3).WT/DSB/21
Page 31
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, Guatemala, Honduras,
Colombia, Panama, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Mexico, Jamaica, Saint Lucia and Colombia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.4).
The representatives of the European Communities, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Ecuador, Panama,
Honduras, Mexico and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.5).
The representatives of the European Communities, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras,
Ecuador, Panama, Costa Rica, Un ited States and Mexico spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.6).
The representatives of the European Communities, Panama, Guatemala, Honduras,
Saint Lucia (on behalf of Dominica and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines), United States and
Ecuador spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 7 April 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommenda tions on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.7).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Panama, Guatemala, Honduras,
United States, Mexico and Saint Lucia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/15/Add.8).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Panama, Honduras, United
States, Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico and Saint Lucia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.WT/DSB/21
Page 32
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.9).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Panama, Honduras, Guatemala,
United States, Saint Lucia and Mexico spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.10).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Honduras, Guatemala, Jamaica,
Mexico, Panama, Saint Lucia, United States and Colombia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.11).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama,
United States, Mexico and Saint Lucia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at is next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on the 23 October 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.12).
The representatives of the European Communities, Honduras, Panama, Ecuador, Jamaica,
Costa Rica, United States, Guatemala, Mexico, Dominica, Colombia, Saint Lucia, Mauritius and
Suriname spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the EC on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS27/51/Add.13).
The representatives of the European Communities, Ecuador, Colombia, Honduras,
Guatemala, Panama, Mexico, United States, Nicaragua and Saint Lucia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statement and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
(c) India
(i) Quantitative restrictions on imports of agricultural, textile and industrial products
(WT/DSB/M/86, 89, 91, 92)
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the status report by India on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS90/16).WT/DSB/21
Page 33
The representatives of India and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by India on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS90/16/Add.1).
The representatives of India and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered the status report by India on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS90/16/Add.2).
The representatives of India and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the status report by India on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS90/16/Add.3).
The representatives of India and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
(d) Japan
(i) Measures affecting agricultural produc ts (WT/DSB/M/74, 76, 77, 78, 80, 84, 86, 89, 91, 92)
At its DSB meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS76/11).
The representatives of Japan, United States, Hungary, Australia and Brazil spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 24 February 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.1).
The representatives of Japan, United States and Australia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 20 March 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.2).
The representatives of Japan, United States and Australia spoke.WT/DSB/21
Page 34
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 7 April 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommenda tions on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.3).
The representatives of Japan, United States and Brazil spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 18 May 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommenda tions on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.4).
The representatives of Japan and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 19 June 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommenda tions on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.5).
The representatives of Japan and the United States spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its progress
in the implementation of the DSB's recommenda tions on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.6).
The representatives of Japan and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter WT/DS76/11/Add.7).
The representatives of Japan, United States, European Communities and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.8).
The representatives of Japan, United States, European Communities and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Japan on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS76/11/Add.9).WT/DSB/21
Page 35
The representatives of Japan, United States, European Communities and Hungary spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
(e) Korea
(i) Definitive safeguard measure on imports of certain dairy products (WT/DSBM/89)
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Korea on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS98/12).
The representatives of Korea and the European Communities spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(ii) Taxes on alcoholic beverages (WT/DSB/M/74)
At its meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Korea on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS75/18 –
WT/DS84/16).
The representatives of Korea, European Communities and Mexico spokeThe DSB took note of the statements.
(f) Turkey
(i) Restrictions on imports of textile and cl othing products (W T/DSB/M/86, 89, 91, 92)
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Turkey on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS34/12).
The representatives of Turkey, India and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 26 September 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Turkey on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS34/12/Add.1).
The representatives of Turkey and India spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 23 October 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Turkey on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS34/12/Add.2).
The representatives of Turkey and India spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.WT/DSB/21
Page 36
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the DSB considered the status report by Turkey on its
progress in the implementation of the DSB's r ecommendations on this matter (WT/DS34/12/Add.3).
The representatives of Turkey and India spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
(g) United States
(i) Anti-dumping duty on dynamic random access memory semiconductors (DRAMS) of one
megabit or above from Korea (WT/DSB/M/74)
At its meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the United States
on its progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter (WT/DS99/6).
The representatives of the United States and Korea spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
(ii) Import prohibition of certain shrimp and shrimp products (WT/DSB/M/70, 71, 74)
At its meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the DSB considered the status report by
the United States on its progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter
(WT/DS58/15/Add.2).
The representatives of the United States, Malaysia, Thailand, India and Australia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 19 November 1999, the DSB considered the status report by the United
States on its progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter
(WT/DS58/15/Add.3).
The representatives of the United States, Malaysia, Australia, India, European Communities
and Ecuador spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next regular
meeting.
At its meeting on 27 January 2000, the DSB considered the status report by the United States
on its progress in the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on this matter
(WT/DS58/15/Add.4).
The representatives of the United States, Malaysia, India, European Communities and
Australia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.WT/DSB/21
Page 37
11. Other matters
(a) United States – Measures affecting textiles and apparel products (WT/DSB/M/70)
At the DSB meeting on 27 October and 3 November 1999, the representative of India
expressed concern about the lack of notification with regard to a settlement reached by the US and the
EC in relation to the dispute on US measures affecting textiles and apparel products (WT/DS151).
The representatives of India, United States, European Communities, Dominican Republic,
Honduras and Hong Kong, China spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(b) Indonesia – Certain measures affecting the automobile industry (WT/DSB/M/71, 77)
At the DSB meeting on 19 November 1999, the representative of the EC made a statement
concerning Indonesia's implementation of the DSB's recommendations in this case (WT/DS54).
The DSB took note of the statement.
At the DSB meeting on 20 March 2000, the representative of the EC made a statement
concerning Indonesia's implementation of the DSB's recommendations in this case.
The representatives of the European Communities and Indonesia spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(c) Withdrawal of an appeal under Rule 30 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review
(WT/DSB/M/72)
At the DSB meeting on 9 December 1999, the representative of India expressed concern
about the US withdrawal of its appeal pursuant to  Rule 30 of the Working Procedures for Appellate
Review in the case on United States – Tax treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" (WT/DS108).
The representatives of India and the United States spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
(d) Questions addressed by delegations to the Chairman of the DSB upon the adoption of the
Reports of the Appellate Body and the Panel on "United States – Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products
Originating in the United Kingdom" at the DSB meeting on 7 June 2000 (WT/DSB/M/84)
At the DSB meeting on 19 June 2000, the Chairman made a statement regarding this matter.
The statement was subsequently circulated in document WT/DSB/W/137.
The DSB took note of the statement.WT/DSB/21
Page 38
(e) Third-party participation in GATT Article XXII consultations in relation to the case on
"United States – Section 306 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Amendments Thereto"
(WT/DSB/M/86)
At the DSB meeting on 27 July 2000, the representative of Japan raised some systemic
concerns regarding the US refusal of his country's request, under Article 4.11 of the DSU, to be joined
in GATT Article XXII consultations requested by the EC on US Section 306 of the Trade Act of 1974
and amendments thereto (WT/DS200/1).
The representatives of Japan, Saint Lucia, Australia, Jamaica, European Communities,
Ecuador, United States, Philippines and Hong Kong, China and the Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(f) Information provided by the EC with regard to  the agreed procedures in the follow-up to the
Foreign Sales Corporations (FSC) dispute (WT/DSB/M/90)
At the DSB meeting on 12 October 2000, the representative of the EC provided information
regarding the understanding reached by the EC and the United States on the procedures in the follow-
up to the FSC dispute (WT/DS108/12).
The representatives of the European Communities, India and Japan spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
(g) Special meeting of the General Council on 22 November 2000 to discuss the communication
from the Appellate Body to the Chairman of the DSB on "European Communities – Measures
Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos – Containing Products" (WT/DSB/M/92)
At the DSB meeting on 17 November 2000, the Chairman put forward a few personal
reflections to enable delegations to prepare for the special meeting of the General Council convened
in order to discuss the communication from th e Appellate Body contained in WT/DS135/9.
The representatives of Canada, Brazil, Zimbabwe, India, Saint Lucia, Australia, United
States, European Communities, the Chairman of the General Council and the DSB Chairman spoke.
The DSB took note of the statements.
(h) Consultations requested by Brazil with the European Communities on its measures affecting
soluble coffee (WT/DSB/M/92)
At the DSB meeting on 17 November 2000, Colombia, speaking on behalf of the Andean
Community and the Central American countries, expressed concern that Brazil had requested
consultations with the EC on its measures affecting soluble coffee (WT/DS209/1) pursuant to
Article XXIII of GATT 1994, thereby preventing other countries having an interest in this matter to
be joined in those consultations.
The representatives of Colombia, Brazil and Saint Lucia spoke.The DSB took note of the statements.
__________