Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry (WT/DS139, WT/DS142): Report of the Panel

Summary

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This proceeding has been initiated by two complaining parties, Japan and the European Communities.

Consultations

In a communication dated 3 July 1998 (WT/DS139/1), Japan requested consultations with Canada in accordance with Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), pursuant to Article XXIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT), Article 8 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs Agreement) (to the extent that Article 8 invokes Article XXIII of GATT 1994), Articles 4 and 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) (to the extent that Article 30 refers to Article XXIII of GATT 1994), and Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS), with respect to certain Canadian measures affecting the automotive industry. Japan and Canada held consultations in Geneva on 27 August 1998, but these consultations did not result in a resolution of the dispute.

In a communication dated 17 August 1998 (WT/DS142/1), the European Communities requested consultations with Canada pursuant to Article 4 of the DSU, Article XXIII:1 of GATT 1994, Article 8 of the TRIMs Agreement, Articles 4 and 30 of the SCM Agreement, and Article XXIII:1 of the GATS, concerning certain measures affecting the automotive sector. The European Communities and Canada held consultations on 21 September and 13 November 1998, but these consultations did not result in a resolution of the dispute.

On 12 November 1998 Japan (WT/DS139/2) and on 14 January 1999 the European Communities (WT/DS142/2) each requested the establishment of a panel pursuant to Articles 4.7 and 6 of the DSU.

Establishment and Composition of the Panel

At its meeting on 1 February 1999, the DSB established a Panel pursuant to the requests by Japan and the European Communities. The DSB agreed, pursuant to Article 9.1 of the DSU, that a single panel should examine both complaints.

At that meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of reference provided for in Article 7.1 of the DSU.