Article in this issue of International Trade Amicus discusses a recent decision of the Indian Supreme Court on maintaining consistency between Indian Domestic Law and WTO: ADA. According to the author the judgement, which holds that definitive anti-dumping duty can be collected only for the period for which provisional anti-dumping duty was imposed, may also prompt the Indian Investigating Authority to complete the investigations ‘normally’ within a period of one year. As usual this issue also covers table containing various trade remedy measures by and against India as initiated during the relevant period.
In WTO, Chinese Taipei has filed dispute against India over Anti-dumping duty imposed by the latter on USB flash drives imported from Chinese Taipei. Safeguard investigations have been initiated by Malaysia and India on imports of hot-rolled coils and four DSB panels have been established on requests from Indonesia, Japan and Chinese Taipei. The disputes involve alleged violation of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures Agreement, GATT 1994, Anti-Dumping Agreement and the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement.
Ratio decidendi portion of this Amicus covers the Supreme Court decision holding that Anti-dumping duty is not imposable on imports made during the period after the expiry of the provisional anti-dumping duty and before the imposition of final/definitive anti-dumping duty. The Apex Court also observed that language of Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act read with the Anti-dumping Rules has to be construed in the same sense as that of the WTO’s Anti-dumping Agreement.
Under News Nuggets, this issue of International Trade Amicus covers Canadian Supreme Court decision allowing Ecuadoreans to sue the Canadian subsidiary of the US parent company to enforce award made by an Ecuadorean court.
