European Union – anti-dumping measures on imports of
certain fatty alcohols from Indonesia

NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY the European Union
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),
AND UNDER RULE 20(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW

The following communication, dated 15 February 2017, from the delegation of the European Union, is being circulated to Members.

_______________

Pursuant to Article 16.4 and Article 17.1 of the DSU the European Union hereby notifies to the Dispute Settlement Body its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in the Panel Report and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel in the dispute European Union – Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Certain Fatty Alcohols from Indonesia (WT/DS442). Pursuant to Rule 23(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review, the European Union simultaneously files this Notice of Other Appeal with the Appellate Body Secretariat.

For the reasons to be further elaborated in its submissions to the Appellate Body, the European Union appeals, and requests the Appellate Body to modify, reverse and/or declare moot and with no legal effect the findings and conclusions of the Panel and complete the analysis with respect to the following errors of law and legal interpretations contained in the Panel Report.^[1]

·                As a preliminary issue the European Union respectfully submits that Indonesia's appeal is inconsistent with Articles 3(1), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5), 3(7), 3(8), 3(9) and 3(10) of the DSU, or any combination thereof, and that the Appellate Body should find that it is unnecessary to rule on the substance of the matters raised by Indonesia as the contested measure has expired, and indeed ceased to exist before the termination of the panel proceedings. If the Appellate Body grants this relief the European Union withdraws all other aspects of its cross‑appeal, pursuant to Rule 30 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review.

However, where the Appellate Body does not grant the relief requested in the preceding paragraph, the EU respectfully submits that:

·                First, by failing to engage with and address the EU communication concerning expiry of the measure and by making recommendations with regard to a measure, which had ceased to exist before the termination of the Panel's proceedings – a fact that was uncontroversial and not contested by Indonesia – the Panel violated Articles 11 and 19.1 of the DSU^[2], and for that reason the European Union requests the Appellate Body to reverse paragraph 8.3 of the Panel Report;