Article 21.3(c) 'Reasonable Period of Time' Arbitration Awards

  • The awards provided on this page consist of all the Article 21.3(c) awards circulated to WTO Members. The list is updated immediately after each new award is circulated.
  • Click on a column header to SORT. Drag column header to top left to GROUP. Click on to FILTER by term/date. Enter date in m/d/yyyy format.
  • All complaints are in PDF format. To view the PDF files, you will need the free Acrobat Reader, which can be downloaded from Adobe.
  • The last column is a link to our Dispute Settlement Commentary for the decision, and is only accessible to subscribers.

 

 

 

Additional Instructions                    /         Back to search form

Field Explanation

"Decision"

 This field indicates the abbreviated title of the dispute, and provides a link to the arbitration award.

"Complainant(s)"

 This field indicates the WTO Member(s) who brought the complaint.  Note that when filtering, "United States" and "European Union/Communities" must be spelled out, rather than abbreviated as EC/EU/U.S.
"DS Number" This field indicates the official WTO DS Number for the dispute.
"Start Date"
and
"End Date"		 To filter by the "Start Date" and "End Date" fields, simply select the desired date for either or both entries. If a selection is made for "Start Date" only, the filter will retrieve all awards circulated on or after that date.  If a selection is made for "End Date" only, the filter will retrieve all awards circulated on or before that date.  If selections are made for both "Start Date" and "End Date," the filter will retrieve all awards circulated between those dates.

"Arbitrator"

 This field indicates the last name of the person who served as Arbitrator.

Explanatory Notes

  • In U.S. - Line Pipe Safeguards (2002), U.S. - Final Lumber AD Determination (2004), Dominican Republic - Cigarettes (2005) and U.S. - Zeroing (Japan) (2007), the parties reached agreement during the course of the proceedings.  Therefore, the Arbitrator circulated a report that describes the procedural background of the proceedings, but contains no findings as to the reasonable period of time.

DSU Article 21.3 provides:

At a DSB meeting held within 30 days11 after the date of adoption of the panel or Appellate Body report, the Member concerned shall inform the DSB of its intentions in respect of implementation of the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. If it is impracticable to comply immediately with the recommendations and rulings, the Member concerned shall have a reasonable period of time in which to do so. The reasonable period of time shall be:

(a) the period of time proposed by the Member concerned, provided that such period is approved by the DSB; or, in the absence of such approval,

(b) a period of time mutually agreed by the parties to the dispute within 45 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings; or, in the absence of such agreement,

(c) a period of time determined through binding arbitration within 90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings.12  In such arbitration, a guideline for the arbitrator13 should be that the reasonable period of time to implement panel or Appellate Body recommendations should not exceed 15 months from the date of adoption of a panel or Appellate Body report. However, that time may be shorter or longer, depending upon the particular circumstances.

11    If a meeting of the DSB is not scheduled during this period, such a meeting of the DSB shall be held for this purpose.

12    If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator within ten days after referring the matter to arbitration, the arbitrator shall be appointed by the Director-General within ten days, after consulting the parties.

13    The expression "arbitrator" shall be interpreted as referring either to an individual or a group.