Skip to main content
×
×
Home

US – Countervailing Duty Investigation of DRAMS: Appellate Body Report, United States – Countervailing Duty Investigation on Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors (DRAMS) from Korea, WT/DS296/AB/R, adopted 20 July 2005

  • JOSEPH F. FRANÇOIS (a1) and DAVID PALMETER (a2)
Copyright
References
Hide All

1 Appellate Body Report, Canada – Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, adopted 20 August 1999, DSR 1999:III, 1377, para. 157.

2 Para. 96. The DSU, of course, is the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes or ‘Dispute Settlement Understanding’.

3 Panel Report, United States – Measures Treating Exports Restraints as Subsidies, WT/DS194/R and Corr., adopted 23 August 2001, DSR 2001:XI, 5767.

4 Panel Report, United States – Countervailing Duty Investigation on Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors (DRAMS) from Korea, WT/DS296/R, adopted 20 July 2005, modified by the Appellate Body Report, WT/DS296/AB/R, para. 7.31.

5 Appellate Body Report, para. 109.

6 Appellate Body Report, para. 109.

7 Appellate Body Report, para. 110.

8 Appellate Body Report, para. 110.

9 Appellate Body Report, para. 110.

10 Appellate Body Report, para. 116.

11 Appellate Body Report, para. 116.

12 Panel Report, para. 7.7.

13 Panel Report, para. 7.51.

14 Panel Report, para. 7.51.

15 Panel Report, para. 7.176.

16 Panel Report, para. 7.176.

17 Panel Report, para. 7.176.

18 Panel Report, para. 7.177 (emphasis added).

19 Appellate Body Report, paras. 142, 143.

20 Appellate Body Report, para. 146 (emphasis in original).

21 Appellate Body Report, para. 146 (quoting from and adding emphasis to Panel Report, para. 7.101).

22 Appellate Body Report, para. 146 (emphasis in original).

23 Appellate Body Report, para. 49 (quoting from Korea's appellee's submission).

24 Appellate Body Report, para. 159.

25 Appellate Body Report, para. 164.

26 Appellate Body Report, para. 165. In footnote 303 to the Report, the Appellate Body referred to decisions under the Anti-Dumping Agreement that reached the same result.

27 Appellate Body Report, paras. 166–169.

28 Appellate Body Report, para. 179.

29 Appellate Body Report, para. 178.

30 Appellate Body Report, para. 179.

31 Appellate Body Report, para. 186.

32 Appellate Body Report, para. 187.

33 Appellate Body Report, para. 188.

34 Appellate Body Report, para. 188.

35 Appellate Body Report, para. 188.

36 Appellate Body Report, para. 188.

37 Appellate Body Report, para. 190.

38 Appellate Body Report, para. 205.

39 See Panel Report, para. 7.204.

40 Panel Report, para. 7.208.

41 Appellate Body Report, para. 207.

42 The problem of the absence of remand authority is discussed in greater detail in David Palmeter and Petros C. Mavroidis, Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization: Practice and Procedure, 2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 227–233; David Palmeter, ‘The WTO Appellate Body Needs Remand Authority’, 32 Journal of World Trade, 51 (1) (1998).

43 Appellate Body Report, paras. 197–198, 208.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

World Trade Review
  • ISSN: 1474-7456
  • EISSN: 1475-3138
  • URL: /core/journals/world-trade-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 16 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 341 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 15th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.