RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
ORGANIZATION 15July1996
(96-2744)
Original: English Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
NOTIFICATION OFLAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5AND 32.6OFTHE AGREEMENTS
Replies ofSLOVENIA1
toquestions posed byARGENTINA2,AUSTRALIA3,theEUROPEAN COMMUNITY4,
HONG KONG5,KOREA6andtheUNITED STATES7
Thefollowingcommunication,dated4July1996,hasbeenreceivedfromthePermanentMission
ofSlovenia.
________________
Argentina
1. Withregard tothecommunication submitted bytheRepublic ofSlovenia on5April 1995, what
istheorder ofprecedence oftheprovisions contained inthatdocument, andwhat istheir
relationship totheGATT Uruguay Round Agreements? Intheevent ofcontradiction between
thelatter andthenotified legislation (such as,forexample, inthecomparison between normal
value andexport priceasprovided forinArticle 2.4.2 oftheAnti-Dumping Agreement), which
willprevail?
Theprovisions included inthenotified documents (i.e., theLaw ontheProtection of
Competition, theDecree onDumped andSubsidized Imports) areadopted bytheSlovenian Parliament
resp. Government andareinforce fromApril 1993resp.July1994. Incaseofcontradiction between
thesaidlegislation andtheUruguay Round Agreement theprovisions oftheAgreement prevail.
Australia
1. What international treaties areenvisaged inthethirdparagraph ofArticle 15oftheLawon
theProtection ofCompetition (page 3)?Ifthisincludes theAgreement Establishing theWTO,
doesthisamount toanincorporation byreference oftheprovisions oftheAnti-Dumping
Agreement regarding normal value? Ifso,what about theother provisions intheWTO
Agreement?
Thereply tothequestion isconfirmative. Theprovision includes theAgreement establishing
theWTO. ThesaidAgreement isratified andisvalid intheRepublic ofSlovenia.
1G/SCM/N/1/SVN/1
2G/ADP/W/320-G/SCM/W/328,3G/ADP/W/337-G/SCM/W/345,4G/ADP/W/328-G/SCM/W/336,
5G/ADP/W/366-G/SCM/W/375,6G/ADP/W/364-G/SCM/W/373,7G/ADP/W/377+Suppl.1-
G/SCM/W/387+Suppl.1.G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page2
2. There appear tobesomeissues intheAnti-Dumping andSubsidies Agreements where thedetail
isnotfullyreflected intheLawandtheDecree. Aretheinvestigating authorities legally bound
tolooktotheAnti-Dumping andSubsidies Agreements fortheirprocedures where there are
suchgaps?
Thereply isconfirmative. TheCompetition Protection Bureau islegally bound tofollow the
provisions oftheAnti-Dumping andSubsidies Agreements.
3. Could Slovenia explain theoperation ofArticles 10(2) and(3)(page 7).
There aredifferent possibilities, themost representative onehastobechosen.
4. Could Slovenia explain theoperation ofthesecond sentence ofArticle 12(4) (page 8).Will
SloveniabepublishingregulationsasrequiredbyArticle14oftheSubsidiesAgreementregarding
other subsidy calculation issues?
Itisthematter ofimplementation oftheLaw. When theDecree isnotincompliance with
themajor act,theprovisions ofthemajor act(theSubsidies Agreement) aredirectly implemented and
theprovisions oftheminor act(theDecree) aresuspended. TheRepublic ofSlovenia willdirectly
useArticle 14oftheSubsidies Agreement untilthenecessary amendments ofSlovenian legislation
shallbebrought in.
TheEuropean Community
Countervailing dutylegislation
WithregardtotheRepublicofSlovenia'scountervailingdutylegislation,notifiedon5April1995
underArticle32.6oftheWTOSubsidiesAgreement(DocumentG/ADP/N/1/SVN/1-G/SCM/N/1/SVN/1),
theEuropean Community would liketoaskthefollowing questions:
1. Could theRepublic ofSlovenia explain whythedefinition ofasubsidy asdescribed inArticle 1
oftheSubsidies Agreement hasnotbeenincorporated inthelegislation?
Thedefinition ofthesubsidy asdescribed inArticle 1oftheSubsidies Agreement hasnotbeen
incorporated inthelegislation because ofthefollowing reasons:
- Slovenia asanewcountry hastoadopt and/or amend avariety oflawsandother
documents. Itisnotaneasyandshort-term task,soSlovenia decided (byaspecial
Constitutional Actfrom1991) toallow direct implementation ofinternational Actsin
thecases where Slovenia ratified suchLaws (Agreements) untilthecorresponding
national legislation willbeadopted;
- TheLaw ontheProtection ofCompetition wasadopted bytheParliament in
March 1993; Slovenia became afullMember ofGATT (andlaterWTO) afterthat
date; astheprocess oftheapproximation ofthelegislation hasnotyetbeenfinished
(infactitstarted in1994), thelegislation concerning subsidized anddumped imports
hasnotyetbeenchanged; nevertheless theamendments areunder preparation and
whatismore important: direct implementation oftheSubsidy Agreement isaccording
tothesaidConstitutional Lawincompliance with Slovenian legislation andthe
Competition Protection Bureau willactaccordingly.G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page3
2. Could theRepublic ofSlovenia explain whythere arenospecificity requirements, asprovided
byArticle 2oftheSubsidies Agreement, incorporated initslegislation?
Thereply tothequestion: seereply under 1.
3. CouldtheRepublicofSloveniaexplainwhytheprovisionsofArticle8oftheSubsidiesAgreement
onnon-actionable subsidies werenotincorporated inthelegislation?
Thereply tothequestion: seereply under 1.
4. WilltheRepublic ofSlovenia, before afinaldetermination ismade inaprocedure, inform all
interested parties oftheessential factsandconsiderations which formthebasisforthedecision whether
toapply definitive measures?
Thereply tothequestion isconfirmative. TheRepublic ofSlovenia willinform allinterested
parties oftheessential factsandconsiderations.
5. CouldtheRepublicofSloveniaexplainwhytherearenoprovisionsonconsultationsincorporated
initslegislation, asprovided forinArticle 13oftheSubsidies Agreement?
Thecorresponding provisions onconsultations areincorporated intheprovisions ofArticle 24/7
oftheDecree ondumped andsubsidized imports.
6. Could theRepublic ofSlovenia explain whytheprovisions onthecalculation oftheamount
ofasubsidy interms ofthebenefit totherecipient, asoutlined inArticle 14oftheSubsidies Agreement,
arenotincorporated inthelegislation?
Because there isnodefinition inSlovenian legislation, taking intoconsideration thereply
under 1.,Slovenia shalldirectly usetheprovisions ofArticle 14oftheSubsidies Agreement.
7. Could theRepublic ofSlovenia explain whytheperiod ofvalidity ofprovisional countervailing
duties maybeextended beyond thatsetoutinArticle 17oftheSubsidies Agreement?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hastoapologise fortheinexact interpretation. Theoriginal Slovenian
text(Decree, Article 29/4) allows prolongation onlyincases ofprovisional anti-dumping duties. The
Republic ofSlovenia shallnotify thecorrigendum.
8. Ifcountervailing measures which havebeen imposed onimports from athird country are
subsequently subject toapartial review, willthefive-year period ofvalidity ofcountervailing measures
re-commence fromthedateofthereview?
Thecorrect reply isthatwhen thecountervailing duties aresubsequently subject toapartial
review, theperiod ofvalidity ofcountervailing measures shallnotexceed thefiveyearperiod from
thedateofthereview which doesnotnecessarily mean thattheperiod shallextend foranother period
offiveyears.
9. Willacopyoftheapplication referred toinArticle 21(1) ofthelegislation oftheRepublic
ofSlovenia beprovided totheknown exporters andtheauthorities oftheexporting country assoon
asaninvestigation hasbeeninitiated?G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page4
Yes, such obligation oftheCompetition Protection Bureau isspecified intheDecree
(Article 24/5); theBureau hastoprovide thecopyofapplication upon prior written request.
Anti-dumping legislation
Q.1 Could Slovenia explain thereference tothe'same leveloftrade, i.e.the"ex-works" value -
theprice atthefactory gate'mentioned inthefirsttwolines ofArticle 9ofEnclosure IIoftheir
notification?
Thenotified decree wasdrafted before theadoption andratification oftheUruguay Round.
Thebasic issue concerns the"same leveloftrade". TheRepublic ofSlovenia willusetheapproach
concerning thesame leveloftrade, yetexworks determination shallnotbeused.
Q.2 Could Slovenia explain howthe'percentage 'dumping margin referred toinArticle 10isapplied
ongoods entering Slovenia. Thatis,would thispercentage which isderived fromthedifference between
two"factory-gate" prices beimposed, without anyadjustment, ontheimport price?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hasnointention oftaking intoaccount theadjustments.
Q.3 Theprovisions ofArticle 23.4ofEnclosure IIon"standing" would appear tobedifferent to
those setoutinArticle 5.4oftheWTO Agreement inthatitseems nottorequire the50percenttest
when the25percenttestismet. Inthiscorrect?
Theconclusion inthequestion iscorrect. There isamistake inthetext. Theredrafting of
thelegislation isbeing started.
Q.4 Withregard totheacceptance ofundertakings, could Slovenia indicate whether theywillapply
theterms ofArticle 8.2oftheWTO Agreement which prohibits theacceptance ofundertakings unless
apreliminary affirmative finding ofdumping andinjury hasbeenmade?
Thereply tothequestion isconfirmative. Thecorresponding provision hasbeenincluded in
theDecree (Article 25/1/3.).
Q.5 Inrelation toArticle 25.7ofEnclosure II,howcould Slovenia impose definitive anti-dumping
measures (inplace ofundertakings) iftheinvestigation hadnotbeencompleted when theundertakings
came intoforce?
Thecorresponding textoftheDecree (Article 25/7) foresees aprovisional andnotdefinitive
measure.
Hong Kong
General
1. Slovenia 'snotification contains PartVoftheLawontheProtection ofCompetition, adopted
on25March 1993 andtheDecree onDumped andSubsidized Imports, adopted on23June1994.
(a) What isthelegalstatus oftheWTO ADAgreement (theAgreement) inSlovenia? Does
ithavetheforce oflaw?G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page5
TheParliament oftheRepublic ofSlovenia adopted Special Act"The Law on
Ratification oftheMarrakesh Agreement Establishing theWorld Trade Organization"
(Official Gazette oftheRepublic ofSlovenia No.36/1995 from30June1995) which
gives theADAgreement theforce oflaw.
(b) AreSlovenia 'sADofficials required, legally orotherwise, toabide bytheAgreement
intheconduct ofADproceedings, ortoconsult theAgreement, forexample onthe
interpretation ofdomestic legislation? Ifthedomestic legislation isinconflict with
theAgreement, which willtakeprecedence?
Slovenian ADofficials havetofollow theAgreement. Incaseofconflict between
domestic lawandtheAgreement, theAgreement prevails.
TheDecree onDumped andSubsidized Imports (theDecree)
Assessment ofnormal value
2. Article 5(1)oftheDecree provides thatifthesaleprice inthecountry oforigin cannot cover
allthecosts, thisprice isconsidered outofbounds ofordinary trade andisnottaken intoaccount
inthedetermination ofnormal value unless itcanbeestablished thatsuchsales werecarried outfor
alonger period oftimeandingreater volume.
Article 2.2.1 oftheAgreement provides thatsalesinthedomestic market atprices below total
perunitcosts maybetreated asnotbeing intheordinary course oftrade byreason ofprice andmay
bedisregarded indetermining normal values onlyiftheauthorities determine thatsuchsalesaremade
within anextended period oftimeinsubstantial quantities andareatprices which donotprovide for
therecovery ofallcosts within areasonable period oftime.
Would Slovenia explain theapparent discrepancy between Article 5(1)oftheDecree and
Article 2.2.1 oftheAgreement?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia canadmit thediscrepancy andexplain thatinsuchcasetheprovisions
oftheAgreement prevail.
3. Article 2.5oftheAgreement provides thatinthecasewhere products areexported tothe
importingcountryfromanintermediatecountry,thepriceatwhichtheproductsaresoldfromthecountry
ofexport totheimporting country should normally becompared withthecomparable priceinthecountry
ofexport.
Article 6oftheDecree however states thatinsuchacase, thenormal value istheprice
comparable totheonepaidforsuchaproduct within theactual trade inthecountry oforigin.
Would Slovenia explain theapparent discrepancy between Article 6oftheDecree andArticle 2.5
oftheAgreement?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hastoapologize forinadequate translation oftheDecree. There
isnodiscrepancy between theoriginal Slovenian wording andtheAgreement, whatcould beseenout
ofprovision ofArticle 15/3oftheLawontheProtection ofCompetition.
TheRepublic ofSlovenia shallnotify thecorrigendum.G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page6
Thecomparison ofnormal value withtheexport price
4. Article 9(5)oftheDecree provides thatthedifferences ingeneral andfixedcosts, including
thecosts ofdevelopment, research andmarketing, arenottaken intoaccount intheprocess ofthe
adaptation ofdifferences intheconditions ofsaleforcomparison ofnormal value andexport price.
Article 2.4oftheAgreement requires afaircomparison anddueallowance bemade forall
differences which affect price comparability.
Ifitisestablished thatcertain differences incosts suchasmarketing would affect price
comparability, would theSlovenian authorities takethisintoaccount inmaking comparison ofnormal
value andexport price?
Ifitisestablished thatcertain differences incosts such asmarketing would affect price
comparability, theSlovenian authorities would takethisintoaccount inmaking comparison ofnormal
value andexport price.
Themargin ofdumping
5. Article 2.4.2 oftheAgreement setsouttherequirements ontheestablishment ofmargins of
dumping including thecomparison ofaweighted average normal value withaweighted average of
prices ofallcomparable export transactions orthecomparison ofnormal value andexport prices on
atransaction totransaction basis. TheArticle alsostates thatanormal value established onaweighted
average basis maybecompared toprices ofindividual export transactions onlyunder certain specified
conditions.
Articles 10(2) and10(3) oftheDecree however onlyprovides verybroad-brush statements on
howtoestablish themargin ofdumping. According toArticle 10(2) oftheDecree, incases where
theprices areconstantly changing, themargin ofdumping isdetermined foreachseparate transaction,
oronthebasis ofthepricewhich ismostfrequent, therepresentative price ortheestablished weighted
average ofprices. Suchaprovision isnotprovided forintheAgreement.
WouldSloveniaexplaininmoredetailhowthedeterminationofmarginofdumpingasprescribed
inArticles 10(2) and10(3) oftheDecree would comply withArticle 2.4oftheAgreement?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hastochoose themostrepresentative ofdifferent potential solutions.
InanycasetheADofficials havetorespect theAgreement.
Commencement ofprocedure
6. Article 12.1.1 oftheAgreement requires thatapublic notice oftheinitiation ofaninvestigation
should contain, orotherwise make available through aseparate report, adequate information including
thebasis onwhich dumping isalleged intheapplication andasummary ofthefactors onwhich the
allegation ofinjury isbased.
Article 23(2) oftheDecree specifies theinformation tobecontained inthedecision on
commencement ofaprocedure andArticle 23(3) requires thedecision tobepublished intheOfficial
Gazette oftheRepublic ofSlovenia (Official Gazette). Some oftheinformation specified under
Article 12.1.1 oftheAgreement isnotincluded intheDecree.G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page7
WouldSloveniaclarifywhetheralltheinformationspecifiedunderArticle12.1.1oftheAgreement
willbepublished intheOfficial Gazette ormade available through aseparate report asrequired under
theAgreement?
TheCompetition Protection Bureau oftheRepublic ofSlovenia willensure thatallinformation
specified under Article 12.1.1 oftheAgreement willbepublished intheOfficial Gazette.
Investigation
7. Theterm "theparties concerned" isfrequently used inArticle 24oftheDecree (eg.in
Articles 24(2), 24(5), 24(6), etc).
Would Slovenia provide further clarifications onthemeaning oftheterm?
Theterm"theparties concerned" includes allparties included (onactive andpassive sides)
intheinvestigation. Thedefinition issetupinArticle 24(4) oftheDecree.
8. Article 24(2) oftheDecree provides thetime-limit within which thedatarequired bytheBureau
fortheProtection ofCompetition (theBureau) should besubmitted aftertheparties concerned had
received theinformation.
(a) Isthere anygeneral ruleforthedateofreceipt oftheinformation bytheparties
concerned? Does thedateofreceipt oftheinformation deem tobeoneweekfromthe
dayonwhich itwassentasprovided forinFootnote 15oftheAgreement?
There isnowritten general ruleconcerning thereceipt oftheinformation bytheparties
concerned. Ifthereisnoreceipt confirmation bytheparty (bycourier), itisconsidered
tobeeight days.
(b) Isextension ofthetime-limit forsubmitting thedatarelated totheinvestigation allowed
bytheBureau asprovided forinArticle 6.1.1 oftheAgreement?
Theextension ofthelimitforsubmitting thedatarelated totheinvestigation isallowed.
Thedecree determines thatthetermshallnotbelessthan30days; thatmeans the
termcanfrom thestartbelonger than30daysand/or extended.
Anti-dumping duties
9. Article 31(1)(a) oftheDecree allows anti-dumping duties beimposed retroactively if,inter
alia,theinjury iscaused bymassive dumped imports ofaproduct inashort time.
Aretheimporters concerned given opportunity tocomment ontheretroactive imposition of
dutyasprovided forinArticle 10.6(ii) oftheAgreement?
Theimporters concerned aregiven theopportunity tocomment ontheretroactive imposition
ofdutyasprovided forinArticle 10.6(ii) oftheAgreement.
10. Article 32(2) oftheDecree setsouttheinformation needed tobeincluded intheactpublished
intheOfficial Gazette should provisional orpermanent duties beenforced. Details suchasthemargins
ofdumping, theexplanation ofthereasons forthemethodology usedintheestablishment, comparison
oftheexport price andthenormal value, andtheconsideration leading totheinjury determinationG/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page8
asprovided forinArticle 12.2.1 oftheAgreement arenotspecified inArticle 32(2) oftheDecree.
Would Slovenia explain whether therequirements under Article 12.2.1 oftheAgreement will
beobserved?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia willobserve therequirements under Article 12.2.1 oftheAgreement.
11. Article 33(1) oftheDecree provides that,incaseananti-dumping dutyisnotdefined atthe
timeofimposition, rulesoforigin ofthegoods usedinthecustoms procedures areapplicable tothese
products aswell.
Would Slovenia provide clarification onthemeaning of"ananti-dumping dutyisnotdefined
atthetimeofimposition"? Under whatcircumstances would ananti-dumping dutynotbedefined at
thetimeofimposition?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hastoapologize formissed translation. Thecorrigendum shallbe
notified.
Other
12. Numerous provisions oftheAgreement arenotreflected inSlovenia 'slegislation orthe
codification maynotbeadequate. Notable examples areasfollows:
- sampling (Article 6.10)
- industrial users andrepresentative consumer organizations (Article 6.12)
- dutyforexporters andproducers notselected insampling (Article 9.4)
- newcomer review (Article 9.5)
- on-site verification (Annex I)
- application ofbestinformation available (Annex II)
(a) Intheabsence ofexplicit domestic provisions reflecting theabove Agreement provisions,
howwillSlovenia ensure compliance withtheAgreement?
Intheabsence ofexplicit domestic provisions, thecompliance withtheAgreement
isensured bythefactthattheSlovenian Parliament adopted theLawonRatification
oftheMarrakesh Agreement Establishing theWorld Trade Organization, which enables
direct implementation.
(b) WillSlovenia contemplate further legislative stepstoensure theconformity ofitslaws,
regulations andadministrative procedures withtheprovisions oftheAgreement, in
accordance withArticle 18.4?
TheRepublic ofSlovenia hasstarted theprogramme oftheapproximation ofitslaws.
Amendment ofanti-dumping andcountervailing legislation ispartoftheprogramme.G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page9
13. What judicial review procedures hasSlovenia putinplace inobservance ofitsobligations
under Article 13(Judicial Review) oftheAgreement?
There isajudicial review possible. Against allactsoftheGovernment anadministrative lawsuit
canbeinitiated attheSupreme Court oftheRepublic ofSlovenia.
14. What isSlovenia 'spolicy andlawfortheimplementation ofWTO Panel Reports?
Theprovision concerning WTO Panel Reports ispartoftheAgreement, soitwillberespected.
Korea
Anti-dumping legislation
1. Threat ofInjury
Article 16of“TheLawontheProtection ofCompetition ”ofyourcountry stipulates: “The
application mustinclude information which shows probability thatdumping orsubsidizing ofanimport
exists, theinjury isbeing cause ormaybecaused onthebasis ofsuchanimport ”.AndArticle 30(5)
of“Adecree ondumped andsubsidized imports ”stipulates :“IftheBureau establishes thatdumping
existed ...butthere isathreat ofsubstantial injury ...dumping duties maybeimposed ”.
Article 3.7oftheA-DAgreement clearly establishes thecriteria onathreat ofmaterial injury
andcausality between dumped import andinjury, stating that“adetermination ofathreat ofmaterial
injury shallbebased onfactsandnotmerely onallegation, conjecture orremote possibility. Thechange
incircumstances ...mustbeclearly foreseen andimminent ”.
Itfurther reiterates inArticle 5.2,withregard toanapplication forinvestigation, that“simple
assertion,unsubstantiatedbyrelevantevidence,cannotbeconsideredsufficienttomeettherequirements”.
AstheWTO provisions above establish, Slovenia hastomake clear thedefinition ofathreat
ofinjury andthecasual linkbetween dumping andinjury, inArticle 15.
Doyouhaveanyintention tomake upforthelackofaccurate information onthecriteria of
athreat ofinjury?
Theprocedure ofamendments oftheLawonProtection ofcompetition hasalready started.
Thefirstdraftincludes thenecessary amendments concerning dumped andsubsidized imports.
Regarding aspecific question concerning thecriteria ofathreat ofinjury, theADofficials
havetofollow (inthecaseofacollision between domestic lawandtheAgreement) theprovisions of
theAgreement.
2. Assessment ofNormal Value
Article 5(1)of“Adecree ondumped andsubsidized imports ”says“Iftheprice...cannot cover
allthecosts ...,thisprice isconsidered tobeoutofbounds ofordinary trade andisnottaken into
account inthedetermination ofnormal value unless itcanbeestablished thatsuchsaleswerecarried
outforalonger period oftime...”G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page10
Article 2.2.1 oftheA-DAgreement, however, describes that“Sales ...atprices below per
unitcosts ...maybetreated asnotbeing intheordinary course oftrade ...andmaybedisregarded
...onlyiftheauthorities determine thatsuchsales aremade within anextended period ...”
Theword “onlyif”should beinterpreted asthesame meaning with“provided ”.Therefore,
theword “unless ”mustbechanged to“onlyif”astheAgreement setsout.
Thequestion concerns thediscrepancy between domestic lawandtheADAgreement. Insuch
cases theADAgreement prevails.
3. Review
Article 35of“ADecree ondumped andsubsidized imports ”says“Through thewhole duration
ofthisprocess (i.e.review) anduntiltheendofthisrevision, themeasure remains inforce ...”
Article 11.4oftheA-DAgreement forces thecontract parties tocarry outreview procedures
expeditiously andtoconclude itwithin twelve months ofthedateofinitiation ofthereview.
Does Slovenia haveanyintention tosetdown theconcrete terms ofreview according tothe
A-DAgreement?
Until aconcrete termofreview isincluded intheSlovenian legislation, theprovisions ofthe
ADAgreement willbeimplemented directly.
United States
1. Article 16oftheSlovenia LawontheProtection ofCompetition indicates thatanti-dumping
andcountervailing duties maybeimposed whendumped orsubsidized imports cause "substantial injury"
tothedomestic industry. Article 13oftheDecree onDumped andSubsidized Imports (theDecree)
defines injury "assubstantial injury orthethreat ofsuchinjury tothedomestic industry orthe
considerable retardation ofthisindustry." Towhatextend dotheseprovisions differ fromthedefinition
ofmaterial injury contained inArticle 3,n.9oftheAnti-Dumping Agreement (A-D Agreement) and
Article 15,n.45oftheAgreement onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures (SCM Agreement)?
There should benodifference. When theprovision ofArticle 13oftheDecree wasdrafted
itwasdonesoaccording totheprovisions ofthedocuments quoted inthecommunication.
2. Article 19oftheDecree, which contains thedomestic industry definition, doesnotprovide
forfindings ofregional industries, aspermitted byArticle 4.2oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 16.3
oftheSCM Agreement. Does Slovenian lawcontemplate suchfindings?
AstheRepublic ofSlovenia adopted theLawonRatification oftheMarrakesh Agreement
Establishing theWorld Trade Organization which gavetheADandSCM Agreements theforce ofthe
Law, thereply isconfirmative.
3. Article 3.2oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 15.2oftheSCMAgreement require anevaluation
of“whether there hasbeenasignificant price undercutting bythedumped imports ascompared with
theprice ofalikeproduct ”orwhether theeffect oftheunfairly traded imports “isotherwise todepress
prices toasignificant degree orprevent price increases, which otherwise would haveoccurred, toa
significant degree. ”Howisthelanguage inArticle 14(1) oftheDecree, stating thatinjury isdeterminedG/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page11
inpartonthebasis oftheimpact oftheunfairly traded imports onprices "especially ifthese areat
alevelthatsignificantly influence thelevelofprices," consistent withArticle 3.2oftheA-DAgreement
andArticle 15.2oftheSCM Agreement?
Thelanguage ofArticle 14(1) oftheDecree isunfortunately duetoapoor interpretation
inconsistent withtheprovisions ofthequoted documents. TheRepublic ofSlovenia shallprovide the
corrigendum; according tothefacts asdetermined under 2.theprovisions oftheADandSCM
Agreements prevail alsowhere there aredifferent provisions inthedomestic legislation.
4. Article 3.4oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 15.4oftheSCMAgreement require anevaluation
ofcertain relevant economic factors intheexamination oftheimpact ofthedumped imports onthe
domestic industry. There isnorequirement inArticle 14.1oftheDecree toevaluate allofthefactors
enumerated inArticle 3.4oftheA-DAgreement and15.4oftheSCMAgreement. HowwillSlovenian
lawimplement these requirements?
Insuchcases theofficials arebound toimplement theprovisions ofADresp.SCM Agreement
directly.
5. Does Article 15oftheDecree, which provides forthecumulative assessment ofinjury from
imports fromseveral countries incertain circumstances, conform totherequirement (contained in
Article 3.3oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 15.3oftheSCMAgreement) thatthecumulated imports
besimultaneously subject toinvestigation?
Article 15oftheDecree conforms totherequirement thatthecumulated imports be
simultaneously subject toinvestigation.
6. Article 17(1) oftheDecree defines threat ofinjury as"asituation inwhich substantial injury
islikely tooccur”.Isthislanguage consistent withArticle 3.7oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 15.7
oftheSCM Agreement which require thatthreat ofmaterial injury “must beclearly foreseen and
imminent ”?
Theprovision ofArticle 17(1) oftheDecree isnotincomplete conformity withtherequirement
thatthreat ofmaterial injury must beclearly foreseen andimminent, sotheofficials willfollow the
latter provision.
7. Article 17(2) oftheDecree provides alistoffactors tobeexamined inthecontext ofathreat
analysis. Does thelanguage requiring anexamination of"thegrowth inthelevelofdumping orof
subsidized imports intotheRepublic ofSlovenia" comply withArticle 3.7(i) oftheA-DAgreement and
Article 15.7(i) oftheSCM Agreement, which require theauthority toconsider a“significant rateof
increase ”ofimports?
Theprovision ofArticle 17(2) oftheDecree fullycomplies withtheprovision ofArticle 3.7
oftheADAgreement and15.7oftheSCM Agreement.
8. Article 17(2) oftheDecree requires anexamination ofthe“export capacities ofthecountry
oforigin orexport already inexistence andwhich islikely tocontinue intheforeseeable future, and
thepossibility ofproducts fromthesecapacities tobesubject ofimports intotheRepublic ofSlovenia. ”
Isthisprovision consistent withtherequirement toanalyze “sufficient freely disposable, oranimminent,
substantial increase in,capacity oftheexporter ”,contained inArticle 3.7oftheA-DAgreement and
Article 15.7oftheSCM Agreement?G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page12
Theprovision ofArticle 17(2) oftheDecree fullycomplies withtheprovision ofArticle 3.7
oftheADAgreement and15.7oftheSCM Agreement.
9. Article 17(2) oftheDecree requires anexamination of"theprices ofimported products which
arelikely tosignificantly cause adepression ofprices (orthemaintenance ofdepressed prices) inthe
domestic market." Isthisprovision construed consistent withtherequirement ofArticle 3.7(iii) ofthe
A-DAgreement andArticle 15.7(iii) oftheSCMAgreement, thattheauthority “consider whether imports
areentering atprices thatwillhaveasignificant depressing orsuppressing effect ondomestic prices,
andwould likely increase demand forfurther imports ”?
Theprovision ofArticle 17(2) oftheDecree fullycomplies withtheprovision ofArticle 3.7
oftheADAgreement and15.7oftheSCM Agreement.
10. Doestherequirement toexamine "thesupply oftheproduct subject totheprocedure" contained
inArticle 17(2) oftheDecree comply withtherequirement ofArticle 3.7(iv) oftheA-DAgreement
andArticle 15.7(iv) oftheSCM Agreement, which require theauthority toconsider “inventories of
theproduct being investigated ”inthecontext ofitsthreat analysis?
Theprovision ofArticle 17(2) oftheDecree fullycomplies withtheprovision ofArticle 3.7
oftheADAgreement and15.7oftheSCM Agreement.
11. Howisthedefinition of"similar products", contained inArticle 18oftheDecree, consistent
withthedefinition of"likeproduct", contained inArticle 2.6oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 15,
n.45oftheSCM Agreement?
Thedefinition ofsimilar product contained inArticle 18oftheDecree differs inwording but
isconsistent withthedefinition ofthe"likeproduct" contained inArticle 2.6oftheADAgreement
resp. Article 15n.46oftheSCM Agreement.
12. IsArticle27(concerningpublicationsofdecisions)oftheDecreeconstruedorappliedconsistently
withthedetailed requirements ofArticle 12oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 22oftheSCMAgreement
concerning public notice andexplanation ofdeterminations?
Article 27oftheDecree isapplied consistently withthedetailed requirement ofArticle 12
oftheADAgreement andArticle 22oftheSCM Agreement. Thesame applies toArticle 23(2) of
theDecree.
13. Article 24(5) oftheDecree requires theBureau to"facilitate totheparties" information which
is"important fortheprotection ofindividual party'sinterests andwhich isusedintheinvestigation
bytheBureau". Tothisend,Article 24(5) allows interested parties to"submit awritten request to
theBureau andspecify thedatawhich thisparty wishes toexamine". Howisthisprovision consistent
withArticles 6.1.2 oftheA-DAgreement and12.1.2 oftheSCM Agreement tomake information
presented inwriting byoneinterested party available toother interested parties, subject tothe
requirement toprotect confidential information? Howisthisprovision consistent withArticles 6.9
oftheA-DAgreement andArticles 12.8oftheSCMAgreement which require theauthority to"inform
allinterested parties oftheessential factsunder consideration which formthebasis ofthedecision,"
without regard towhether aspecific request forparticular information hasbeentendered? Howcan
aparty identify information withparticularity when itmaynotknow whatinformation theBureau may
useinitsinvestigation, much lesshaveinitspossession?G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page13
Thedefinition asincluded inArticle 24(5) oftheDecree seems toraisealotofopenquestions.
Theofficials oftheBureau arebound tofollow theprovisions ofallquoted documents (theprovisions
oftheADAgreement andtheSCM Agreement prevail, when thereisinconsistency between provisions).
14. HowdoesSlovenian lawimplement therequirement ofArticle 6.13oftheA-DAgreement and
Article12.11oftheSCMAgreement,whichrequiretheauthoritiestotakeintoaccountparties’difficulties
insupplying theinformation requested?
TheSlovenian Lawallows direct implementation ofArticle 6.13oftheADAgreement and
Article 12.11 oftheSCM Agreement.
15. Theterm“party”isusedin,interalia,Article 24oftheDecree, butisnotdefined. Does
Slovenia ’sapplication orconstruction ofthistermconform withtheinterested party definition in
Article 6.11oftheA-DAgreement andArticle 12.9oftheSCM Agreement?
Theterm"party" includes allparties included (onactive andpassive sides) intheinvestigation.
Thedefinition issetupinArticle 24(4) oftheDecree.
16. Article 22oftheDecree provides fortherejection ofanapplication upon afinding thatthe
dumped orsubsidized imports are"insignificant". Isthelanguage "except incases where thetotal
import formmorethanonecountry amount tomorethanseven percent ofthetotalimport oflikeproducts
intotheRepublic ofSlovenia" consistent withthelanguage "unless countries which individually account
forlessthan3percentoftheimports ofthelikeproduct intheimporting Member collectively account
formorethan7percentofimports ofthelikeproduct intheimporting Member", contained inArticle 5.8
oftheA-DAgreement?
Thelanguage ofArticle 22oftheDecree isconsistent withthelanguage ofArticle 5.8ofthe
ADAgreement.
17. Where doesSlovenian lawaddress therequirements ofArticle 27.10 oftheSCM Agreement,
which provides fortermination ofaninvestigation ofproducts originating inadeveloping country in
specific circumstances?
According toabsence ofthecorresponding provision thedirect implementation ofArticle 27.10
oftheSCM Agreement ispossible.
18. HowdoesArticle 29oftheDecree, governing provisional measures, fulfilthepreconditions
fortheimposition ofprovisional measures setforth inArticle 7.1(i)-(ii) oftheA-DAgreement and
Article 17.1(a)-(b) oftheSCM Agreement?
Article 29oftheDecree fulfils thepreconditions fortheimposition ofprovisional measures
setforthinArticle 7.1oftheADAgreement andArticle 17.1oftheSCM Agreement. Thequestion
concerning non-conformity ofprovisions might arise duetoinexact interpretation which callsfor
corrigendum.
19. Howisthecondition contained inthesecond paragraph ofArticle 31(1)(a) oftheDecree
(governing theretroactive imposition ofanti-dumping duties) stating thatthedumping "iscarried out
tosuchanextent thattheimport duties forsuchimports mustbeenforced retroactively toprevent the
repetition ofsuchoccurrences" consistent withthecondition setforth inArticle 10.6oftheA-D
Agreement, stating thatthedumping "islikely toseriously undermine theremedial effect ofthedefinitive
anti-dumping dutytobeapplied"?G/ADP/Q1/SVN/1
G/SCM/Q1/SVN/1
Page14
ThegeneralruleisthatwhenthereisaninconsistencybetweentheDecreeandtheADAgreement
andtheSCM Agreement thelatter prevail comes intoforce.
20. HowdoesArticle31fulfiltherequirementofArticle10.6(ii)oftheA-DAgreementthatretroactive
duties beimposed onlyafter"theimporters concerned havebeengiven anopportunity tocomment"?
ThegeneralruleisthatwhenthereisaninconsistencybetweentheDecreeandtheADAgreement
andtheSCM Agreement thelatter prevail comes intoforce.
(Supplement)
1. Could youplease explain howthecomparison methodologies inArticles 10.2and10.3[page 7]
areconsistent withthecomparison methodologies contained inA-DArticle 2.4.2?
IncasetheADofficials cannot follow theprovisions ofArticles 10.2and10.3oftheDecree
intheessence ofArticle 2.4.2 oftheADAgreement, theyarebound tofollow theprovisions ofthe
latter.
2. There doesnotappear tobearequirement under Slovenian lawthatasubsidy bespecific in
order tobecountervailable. Isthiscorrect?
There isnotaspecific provision intheSlovenian Law; nevertheless according totheLawon
Ratification oftheMarrakesh Agreement Establishing theWorld Trade Organization there isdirect
implementation ofArticle 2oftheSCM Agreement.
3. Article 21[page 10-11] doesnotappear torequire thatthethresholds forindustry support
contained inA-DArticle 5.4.Under Slovenian lawcananapplication berejected thatdoesnotmeet
these thresholds?
Thecorresponding provision concerning thresholds isincluded inArticle 23oftheDecree.
TheBureau canreject theapplication thatdoesnotmeetthese thresholds.
4. What provision hasbeenmade forconducting “newshipper reviews ”asrequired byA-D
Article 9.5?
There isdirect implementation ofArticle 9.5oftheADAgreement possible.
5. What provision hasbeenmade forjudicial review ofadministrative decisions asrequired by
A-DArticle 13?
There isajudicial review possible. Against allactsoftheGovernment oftheRepublic of
Slovenia anadministrative lawsuit canbeinitiated attheSupreme Court oftheRepublic ofSlovenia.
Itisthegeneral rule.