Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dvmhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T05:05:56.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

United States – Section 129(c)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (WTO Doc. WT/DS22/R of 15 July 2002): Beating Around (The) Bush

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

Kyle Bagwell  and
Petros C. Mavroidis
Kyle Bagwell
Affiliation:
Columbia University and NBER
Petros C. Mavroidis
Affiliation:
Columbia Law School, University of Neuchâtel and CEPR
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this dispute, Canada attacks Section 129(c)(1) of the US trade legislation as a result of the entry into force of the Uruguay Round Agreements [Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), hereinafter “Section 129”] which provides that a new antidumping or countervailing duty determination made by the Department of Commerce (DOC) or the International Trade Commission (ITC) to bring a previous antidumping, countervailing duty or injury determination into conformity with an adverse WTO panel or Appellate Body report applies only to imports that enter the United States on or after the date that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) directs implementation of the new determination.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 4 , Special Issue S1: The WTO Case Law Of 2002 , 2005 , pp. 12 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

References

Bagwell, Kyle and Staiger, Robert W.. 2002. The Economics of the World Trading System, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mavroidis, Petros C. 2000. Remedies In The WTO: Between A Rock And A Hard Place, 11 European Journal of International Law, 763–813.Google Scholar