This thesis evaluates the arguments for replacing antidumping laws with competition laws or, alternatively, for recasting antidumping laws in the pattern of competition laws. / The work discusses the objectives and criteria used in antidumping and antitrust cases. It highlights the harmful and chilling effects of antidumping sanctions. It is a study of whether antidumping laws should be replaced by either supra national (Competition laws) or harmonised domestic antitrust regimes, which penalise international predatory pricing without at the same time penalising non-predatory international price discrimination. / It is suggested that progressive reforms of antidumping rules should become an agenda item of all future WTO Rounds and should focus on reconciling antidumping rules with antitrust treatment of predatory pricing practices. / The progressive inclusion of antitrust criteria into WTO antidumping laws should be made a condition for progress in future WTO negotiations.

No description available.

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

published_or_final_version / abstract / Law / Master / Doctor of Legal Studies

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, School of Law / The research is divided in seven sections where the problem of the interpretation and applicability of Art XXIII GATT to the Laws and Practices under the Anti-Dumping Agreement is examined. Chapter I identifies the problems, raises the research question and gives an overview of the current state of the matters under observation. In Chapter II the general theory of interpretation is studied and subsequently applied to Art XXIII specifically, taking into account the meaning, scope, historical evolution and current interpretations of Art XXIII. Chapter III revises the theory of coherent interpretation of Art XXIII in connection with the Anti-Dumping Agreement specifically. The constitutional structure and principles of the WTO are questioned, dissected and supported to decant a handful of fundamental principles which shall inform the rest of the interpretation applied in the research. This chapter takes the interpretation from an abstract perspective to a material view of a coherent interpretation of both Art. XXIII and the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Chapter IV revises the facts, laws and practices of Anti-Dumping being used as a protectionist measure in disguise both using procedural and substantial arguments which are illustrated in the laws and practices of seven countries. The findings in Chapter IV lead to Chapter V which questions the legitimacy and validity of considering the possible applicability of Art XXIII to the anti-Dumping Agreement as it is currently implemented by the WTO membership. Those reflections lead to the consideration and mention of Competition as a public good in international trade in Chapter VI, which is a key element for the final findings of this research. The conclusion of this research is inclined to suggest that in order to keep the legal system of the WTO functional, a stronger economic constitutional approach that allows for the application of art XXIII in situations subversive to the principles of free trade is necessary. The adaptation of a theory of an economic constitution is proposed.

The application of anti-dumping and countervailing measures has always been controversial, particularly, as they do not address the issue of the level of local value added in the production process. Are these measures simply industry assistance measures under another guise, or are they to protect the 'fair trade' framework to further the opportunity for free trade? All the indications are that these measures reflect the former option. However, the global political climate as represented through the GATT and now the WTO Agreements is to tolerate the imposition of both anti-dumping and countervailing measures provided they are applied according to the provisions of the Agreements. It is becoming increasingly more difficult for any nation state to abolish the right of their 'guest' industries to obtain anti-dumping or countervailing relief, given the economic power of multinational industries operating within their boundaries. The practical issue is for each nation state to use these measures in a way which is of least detriment to their economy. Gruen in 1986 reviewed the application of the then Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Act 1975, and found that there needed to be a tightening-up of the injury test applied to anti-dumping cases. It is recommended that Gruen's tougher injury standards be implemented forthwith. He also recommended a continuing role for the Industry Commission as the appeal body for a review of the facts, and for there to be a continuing assessment of the effects of the measures imposed. The government, however, created an Anti-Dumping Authority attached to the then Department of Industry Technology and Commerce (DITAC), whose member and officers came from that department. The principal function of this body was to review the preliminary decisions of Customs, and to recommend the imposition of duties or acceptance of an undertaking to the Minister. There was no provision for an independent review of facts. One of the results of the increased complexity of the existing process and consequently the law, is a large increase in litigation before the Federal Court. There is a need to simplify the administrative structure and the provisions of the domestic law. The latter should be accomplished by the incorporation of the provisions of the WTO Agreements directly into domestic law. The espoused policy objectives of the government have not been met. The application of anti-dumping and countervailing measures favour import competing industries, and are against countries from which imports are growing. Korea and China have been singled out, with these countries showing the highest incidence of import weighted of anti-dumping measures. They also happen to be countries with which Australia has a trade surplus, a policy factor which is neglected by the administering authorities. There is a need to redress this imbalance. Predation identified by the government as a reason for taking anti-dumping action, has been shown not to be a reason for the application of anti-dumping duties in Australia. As a small country, Australia should take advantage of the use of the WTO dispute settlement process in settling anti-dumping and countervailing disputes. Consultations should commence at the earliest possible stage in inquiries, with the view to the settlement of the dispute by trade negotiation so that the outcome can be beneficial to both parties. This may, for example, allow for the specialisation in production between the two Members. WTO dispute settlement is seen as a positive approach to dispute settlement, whereas the use of the domestic courts tends to elevate the dispute between the parties. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade needs to take a leadership role in settling all anti-dumping and countervailing actions through the WTO dispute settlement process, with a view to a positive outcome for both Members. Placing an anti-dumping import tax on intermediate products entering Australia is counter-productive, as it increases the cost of inputs to downstream users. Temporary relief should be given by way of production subsidy, if the matter cannot be resolved through WTO trade consultations.

The application of anti-dumping and countervailing measures has always been controversial, particularly, as they do not address the issue of the level of local value added in the production process. Are these measures simply industry assistance measures under another guise, or are they to protect the 'fair trade' framework to further the opportunity for free trade? All the indications are that these measures reflect the former option. However, the global political climate as represented through the GATT and now the WTO Agreements is to tolerate the imposition of both anti-dumping and countervailing measures provided they are applied according to the provisions of the Agreements. It is becoming increasingly more difficult for any nation state to abolish the right of their 'guest' industries to obtain anti-dumping or countervailing relief, given the economic power of multinational industries operating within their boundaries. The practical issue is for each nation state to use these measures in a way which is of least detriment to their economy. Gruen in 1986 reviewed the application of the then Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Act 1975, and found that there needed to be a tightening-up of the injury test applied to anti-dumping cases. It is recommended that Gruen's tougher injury standards be implemented forthwith. He also recommended a continuing role for the Industry Commission as the appeal body for a review of the facts, and for there to be a continuing assessment of the effects of the measures imposed. The government, however, created an Anti-Dumping Authority attached to the then Department of Industry Technology and Commerce (DITAC), whose member and officers came from that department. The principal function of this body was to review the preliminary decisions of Customs, and to recommend the imposition of duties or acceptance of an undertaking to the Minister. There was no provision for an independent review of facts. One of the results of the increased complexity of the existing process and consequently the law, is a large increase in litigation before the Federal Court. There is a need to simplify the administrative structure and the provisions of the domestic law. The latter should be accomplished by the incorporation of the provisions of the WTO Agreements directly into domestic law. The espoused policy objectives of the government have not been met. The application of anti-dumping and countervailing measures favour import competing industries, and are against countries from which imports are growing. Korea and China have been singled out, with these countries showing the highest incidence of import weighted of anti-dumping measures. They also happen to be countries with which Australia has a trade surplus, a policy factor which is neglected by the administering authorities. There is a need to redress this imbalance. Predation identified by the government as a reason for taking anti-dumping action, has been shown not to be a reason for the application of anti-dumping duties in Australia. As a small country, Australia should take advantage of the use of the WTO dispute settlement process in settling anti-dumping and countervailing disputes. Consultations should commence at the earliest possible stage in inquiries, with the view to the settlement of the dispute by trade negotiation so that the outcome can be beneficial to both parties. This may, for example, allow for the specialisation in production between the two Members. WTO dispute settlement is seen as a positive approach to dispute settlement, whereas the use of the domestic courts tends to elevate the dispute between the parties. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade needs to take a leadership role in settling all anti-dumping and countervailing actions through the WTO dispute settlement process, with a view to a positive outcome for both Members. Placing an anti-dumping import tax on intermediate products entering Australia is counter-productive, as it increases the cost of inputs to downstream users. Temporary relief should be given by way of production subsidy, if the matter cannot be resolved through WTO trade consultations.

On January 1, 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) entered into by and between Mexico, Canada and the United States, came into force. Chapter 19 of NAFTA addresses the Review and Dispute Settlement in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Matters. Furthermore, article 1904 of NAFTA, addresses issues related to the Review of Final Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Determinations. The said article stipulates that an involved Party may request that a panel review, based on the administrative record, a final antidumping or countervailing duty determination of a competent investigating authority of an importing Party. The object of such review is to determine whether the determination was in accordance with the antidumping or countervailing duty law of the importing Party. In order to review such determination, the panel shall apply the standard of review set out in Annex 1911 of NAFTA, and the general legal principles that a court of the importing Party otherwise would apply to review a determination of the competent investigating authority. / Since these kinds of regulations are quite new in the Mexican legal system, the interpretation of the standard of review, has raised a lot of discussion among several panelists, governmental authorities and authors. Therefore, this paper will focus on the application and interpretation of the standard of review under NAFTA chapter 19, mainly by Mexican authorities.

No description available.