In particular, Canada claimed that in initiating the Lumber IV investigation, the United States had violated Articles 10, 11.4 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement.In all the other claims, the new request corresponded to the previous one (18 July 2002).Some measures with a very close relationship to the declared “measure taken to comply”, and to the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in the original proceedings, may also be susceptible to review by a compliance panel.
The panel decided to apply judicial economy as regards Canada’s claims under Article 19.4 SCM Agreement and Article VI:3 of the GATT 1994 concerning the methodologies used to calculate the subsidy rate; and its claims of violation of the procedural rules of evidence set forth in Article 12 SCM Agreement.
Further to Canada’s statement at the first substantive meeting of the panel with the parties that it did not consider it appropriate to press its claims under Articles 10, 11.4 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement concerning the initiation of the investigation, the panel also refrained from addressing and making a ruling on these claims.
Accordingly, the panel recommended that the DSB request the United States to bring its measure into conformity with its obligations under the SCM Agreement and the GATT 1994.
On 2 October 2003, the United States notified the DSB of 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.
Canada contended that these measures were inconsistent with, and violate the United States’ obligations under Articles 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 22 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement and Articles VI:3 and X:3 of the GATT 1994.
On 18 July 2002, Canada requested the establishment of a panel.
However, on 3 October 2003, the United States withdrew its notice of appeal for scheduling reasons, although the withdrawal was conditional on the United States' right to file a new notice of appeal within the timeframe permitted by the DSU.
On 21 October 2003, the United States notified the DSB of its decision to re-file its appeal to the Appellate Body of certain issues of law covered in the panel report and certain legal interpretations developed by the panel.
On 2 November 2005, the Chairman of the Appellate Body informed the DSB that the Appellate Body would not be able to circulate its report within the 60-day period due to the time required for completion and translation of the report and estimated that the Appellate Body report would be circulated to WTO Members no later than 5 December 2005.