Scm Agreement Article 3


 セックスレス危険度診断を受ける
bitFlyer ビットコインを始めるなら安心・安全な取引所で
02

 今すぐ確認する



02

 今すぐ購読する

7.9 If, within six months of the date the DSB adopts the panel`s report or the appellate body`s report, the member has not taken appropriate steps to eliminate the adverse effects of the subsidy or withdraw the subsidy, the DSB authorizes the requesting member to take counter-measures corresponding to the degree and nature of the negative effects found, unless the DSB agrees to reject the request. 5.70 With respect to the example of direct and indirect subsidies (point 5.68), Canada notes that, although no conflicting conclusion can be drawn from point (a) that indirect subsidies are permitted, a section 3 party could demonstrate that a contested subsidy is not “subject to export performance”; or may show that a contested contribution is not a subsidy, in accordance with Article 1. For Canada, neither argument would draw a point from the illustrative list to the contrary. 6.7 Eviction or obstruction resulting in serious impairments cannot occur under paragraph 3 if, during the reporting period, there is one of the following circumstances (b) if there are penalties – in the sense of a reduction or withdrawal of payments – in the absence of exports; or 5.63 Canada argues that three contextual elements support this analysis. v) is available to all companies that can support new equipment and/or production processes. 5.76 For Canada, the refusal of an “export propensity test” and the modification of a footnote test on the basis of “intent” to compliance on the basis of the conditions attached to the subsidy (d). (h) if a subsidy is indeed related to export attachés) has led to the “common conclusion”132 that neither the export trend nor the “intent” to increase exports is a correct measure in determining whether a subsidy is “effectively dependent on exports”. On the contrary, it is necessary to check whether the subsidy in question is only available for exports or only on the condition that goods are exported. 7.10 If a party to the dispute requests arbitration within the meaning of Article 22, paragraph 6 of the DSU, the arbitrator decides whether the counter-measures are consistent with the magnitude and nature of the adverse effects found. 4.12 For the purposes of litigation at issue under this section, with the exception of the time frame expressly set out in this article, the DSU`s time frame for enforcement of such disputes is half the time frame set out in this section. . . .

(iii) costs related to consulting services and equivalent services used exclusively for research, including purchased research, technical knowledge, patents, etc.; (e) a voluntary reduction in the availability of the product concerned from the complaining member for export (including a situation in which the complainant`s companies independently redistribute exports of that product to new markets); 1.1 For the purposes of this agreement, a grant is deemed to be granted if: 4.3 At the request for consultation in paragraph 1, the member who is presumed to grant or maintain the grant in question begins these consultations as soon as possible.

質問&相談事項はLINE@からお願いします。

友だち追加


Share Buttons

コメントは受け付けていません。