| |
| | [No title] |
 | | Therefore, in discerning the likelihood of dumping standard under US law, the statute, SAA, and Sunset Policy Bulletin are “inseparable and should not be read independently from each other when evaluating the overall conformity of the law with WTO obligations.” The statutory provision, 19 USC. |
 | | The likelihood determination required by Article 11.3 must be based on “all relevant evidence,” not on “the mechanistic application of presumptions.” Ultimately, however, the Appellate Body did not decide whether the Sunset Policy Bulletin is inconsistent with Article 11.3 as such. |
 | | Therefore, in evaluating whether the Commission’s likelihood of injury determination in the sunset review of OCTG from Argentina was consistent with Article 11.3, the panel must consider whether the Commission based its determination on positive evidence and examined the facts objectively. |
| www.wto.org /english/tratop_e/dispu_e/268r_d_e.doc (10485 words) |
|