#1959874
Cásdlí EDT
WTO case-law
Filter results
Collections
1,224 results in 248 documents
#1975336
De bhun mhír 2 d’Airteagal II den Chomhaontú lena mbunaítear an Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála (“Comhaontú EDT”), is codanna lárnacha de Chomhaontú EDT iad na comhaontuithe agus na hionstraimí dlíthiúla gaolmhara atá ar áireamh in Iarscríbhinní 1, 2 agus 3 (“Comhaontuithe Trádála Iltaobhacha”) a ghabhann leis, lena n-áirítear an Comhaontú Ginearálta um Tharaifí agus Thrádáil 1994 (CGTT 1994), atá ina gceangal ar gach Comhalta den Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála (EDT), lena n-áirítear an tAontas.
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article II of the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (‘WTO Agreement’), the agreements and associated legal instruments included in Annexes 1, 2 and 3 (‘Multilateral Trade Agreements’) thereto, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), are integral parts of the WTO Agreement, binding on all Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), including the Union.
#1975337
De bhun mhír 1 d’Airteagal IV de Chomhaontú EDT, féadfaidh EDT cinntí a ghlacadh maidir le gach ábhar a chumhdaítear faoi aon cheann de na Comhaontuithe Trádála Iltaobhacha.
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article IV of the WTO Agreement, the WTO may adopt decisions on all matters under any of the Multilateral Trade Agreements.
#1975338
I gcomhréir le mír 3 d’Airteagal IX de Chomhaontú EDT, féadfaidh EDT a chinneadh, faoi chúinsí eisceachtúla, oibleagáid arna forchur ar Chomhalta ag Comhaontú EDT nó ag aon cheann de na Comhaontuithe Iltaobhacha Trádála a tharscaoileadh.
In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article IX of the WTO Agreement, in exceptional circumstances, the WTO may decide to waive an obligation imposed on a Member by the WTO Agreement or by any of the Multilateral Trade Agreements.
#1975343
Is iomchuí an seasamh a atá le glacadh thar ceann an Aontais i gComhairle Ghinearálta EDT a bhunú ós rud é go mbeidh síneadh ama an tarscaoilte EDT maidir le fabhair uathrialacha trádála arna ndeonú ag an Aontas do na Balcáin Thiar ina cheangal ar Chomhaltaí EDT,
It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on behalf of the Union in the General Council of the WTO, as the extension of the WTO waiver on autonomous trade preferences granted by the Union to the Western Balkans will be binding on Members of the WTO,
#1986795
comhchuibhiú beart le caighdeáin idirnáisiúnta a chur chun cinn, i gcomhréir le Comhaontú SPS EDT;
promote the harmonisation of measures with international standards, in accordance with the WTO SPS Agreement;
#2009600
Bhí sé seo lasamuigh de raon feidhme rialacha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála de réir Rialtas na Síne.
This was beyond the scope of WTO rules according to the GOC.
#2018724
Ar dtús, d’áitigh CCCMC nach bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán i gcomhréir le dlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (EDT).
First, CCCMC argued that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is inconsistent with WTO law.
#2018800
An rud is tábhachtaí, ní críochnaitheach na torthaí ón díospóid sin toisc go ndearna an tAontas agus an Rúis araon achomharc ina gcoinne agus, dá bhrí sin, de réir chásdlí seasmhach EDT, níl aon stádas dlíthiúil acu i gcóras GATT nó EDT ós rud é nár formhuiníodh iad trí chinntí ó na PÁIRTITHE CONARTHACHA in GATT nó ó Chomhaltaí EDT.
Most importantly, the findings in that dispute are not final as both the EU and Russia have appealed them and therefore, according to standing WTO case-law, have no legal status in the GATT or WTO system since they have not been endorsed through decisions by the Contracting Parties to GATT or WTO Members.
#2018814
Sa chúigiú dul síos, mhaígh CCCMC agus na trí tháirgeoir onnmhairiúcháin nach bhfuil aon bhunús dlí in EDT chun ríomh gnáthluacha a chur i bhfeidhm lasmuigh de chreat Chomhaontú Frithdhumpála EDT ó chuaigh Prótacal Aontachas na Síne le EDT in éag i mí na Nollag 2016.
Fifth, CCCMC and the three exporting producers submitted that since the expiry of the WTO Chinese Accession Protocol in December 2016, there is no legal basis in the WTO to apply a normal value calculation outside the framework of the WTO ADA.
#2019594
EDT DS 494, EU – Cost Adjustment Methodologies, míreanna 7.76, 7.80 agus 7.81.
WTO DS 494, EU – Cost Adjustment Methodologies, paragraphs 7.76, 7.80 and 7.81.
#2062607
Tagraíonn taraif-chuótaí EDT atá ann cheana, mar a shainítear sa Chomhaontú, do lamháltais EDT an Aontais a áirítear i ndréachtsceideal AE28 de lamháltais agus gealltanais faoi CGTT 1994 arna gcur faoi bhráid EDT le doiciméad G/MA/TAR/RS/506 mar a leasaítear le doiciméid G/MA/TAR/RS/506/Add.1 agus G/MA/TAR/RS/506/Add.2.
The existing WTO tariff quotas as defined in the Agreement refer to WTO concessions of the Union included in the draft EU28 schedule of concessions and commitments under GATT 1994 submitted to the WTO in document G/MA/TAR/RS/506 as amended by documents G/MA/TAR/RS/506/Add.1 and G/MA/TAR/RS/506/Add.2.
#2136116
Bhí sé seo lasmuigh de raon feidhme rialacha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála de réir Rialtas na Síne.
This was beyond the scope of WTO rules according to the GOC.
#2140244
D’áitigh Ketong nach luíonn an mhodheolaíocht a fhorordaítear le hAirteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán chun críche an gnáthluach a bhunú le Prótacal maidir le hAontachas na Síne leis an Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála (EDT), le Comhaontú Frithdhumpála EDT, agus leis an rialú ó Chomhlacht Réiteach Díospóide EDT, agus nár cheart iad a chur chun feidhme, dá bhrí sin.
Ketong argued that the methodology prescribed by Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation for the purpose of establishing the normal value is incompatible with China’s Protocol of Accession to the WTO, the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (‘ADA’), and WTO Dispute Settlement Body (‘DSB’) ruling, and should thus not be applied.
#2140251
Ar an gcaoi chéanna, d’áitigh Shenghua nach bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán i gcomhréir le dlí EDT.
Similarly, Shenghua argued that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is inconsistent with WTO law.
#2141255
Go bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán ar neamhréir le hAirteagal 2.2 agus 2.2.1.1 de Chomhaontú Frithdhumpála EDT (“ADA”) agus le dlí-eolaíocht EDT;
Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is inconsistent with the Article 2.2 and 2.2.1.1 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (‘ADA’) and the WTO jurisprudence;
#2141281
I ndáil le cás DS494, meabhraíonn an Coimisiún freisin go ndearna an tAontas agus Cónaidhm na Rúise araon achomharc i gcoinne thorthaí an Phainéil, ní críochnaitheach na torthaí sin agus dá bhrí sin, i gcomhréir le cásdlí EDT, níl stádas dlíthiúil acu i gcóras EDT, ó tharla nár formhuiníodh iad le cinntí ó Chomhaltaí EDT.
Moreover, in relation to the case DS494, the Commission further recalls that both the Union and the Russian Federation appealed the findings of the Panel, which are not final and therefore, according to standing WTO case-law, have no legal status in the WTO system, since they have not been endorsed through decisions by WTO Members.
#2142130
Ionadaí Trádála na Stát Aontaithe, 2019 Report on China’s WTO Compliance, Márta 2020.
United States Trade Representative, ‘2019 Report on China’s WTO Compliance’, March 2020.
#2155269
I ndáil le cás an Aontais – Coigeartaithe Costas, meabhraíonn an Coimisiún go ndearna an tAontas agus Cónaidhm na Rúise araon achomharc i gcoinne thorthaí an Phainéil, ní críochnaitheach na torthaí sin agus dá bhrí sin, i gcomhréir le cásdlí EDT, níl stádas dlíthiúil acu i gcóras EDT, ó tharla nár formhuiníodh iad le cinntí ó Chomhaltaí EDT.
In relation to the case EU - Cost adjustment, the Commission recalls that both the EU and the Russian Federation appealed the findings of the Panel, which are not final and therefore, according to standing WTO case-law, have no legal status in the WTO system, since they have not been endorsed through decisions by WTO Members.
#2155337
Dá réir sin, tháinig an grúpa ZTT ar an gconclúid go bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) ar neamhréir le comhaontuithe EDT, lena n-áirítear Prótacal Aontachais na Síne leis an EDT, na le dlí-eolaíocht an Chomhlachta um Réiteach Díospóidí.
Consequently, ZTT concluded that Article 2(6a) is incompatible with the WTO agreements, including China’s Protocol of Accession to the WTO, and the jurisprudence of the DSB.
#2155424
Thug an Coimisiún aghaidh go forleathan ar an tsaincheist maidir le comhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán le dlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (EDT) in aithrisí (146), (179) agus (168).
The Commission extensively addressed the issue of WTO compatibility of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with WTO law in recitals (146) and (179) and (168).
#2166282
Tacaíocht intíre ón Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála
WTO domestic support
#2174341
Bhí sé seo lasmuigh de raon feidhme rialacha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála de réir Rialtas na Síne.
This was beyond the scope of WTO rules according to the GOC.
#2179637
Ina theannta sin, thug CCCME an bharúil go dtéann coincheap an tsaofa shuntasaigh in aghaidh dhlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (“EDT”) toisc nach ann don choincheap sin faoi Airteagal 2.2 de Chomhaontú Frithdhumpála EDT (“ADA”).
In addition, CCCME commented that the concept of significant distortions runs against the WTO law because such concept does not exist under Article 2.2 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (‘ADA’).
#2179650
Maidir le díospóid EDT, An tAontas Eorpach – Modheolaíochtaí Coigeartaithe Costas II, mheabhraigh an Coimisiún go ndearna an tAontas Eorpach agus an Rúis araon achomharc i gcoinne thorthaí an Phainéil, nach críochnaitheach na torthaí sin dá bhrí sin agus, i gcomhréir le cásdlí EDT, nach bhfuil stádas dlíthiúil acu ó tharla nár formhuinigh Comhaltaí EDT iad.
As for the WTO dispute EU – Cost Adjustment Methodologies II, the Commission recalled that both the EU and Russia appealed the findings of the Panel, which are therefore not final and, according to standing WTO case-law, have no legal status since they have not been endorsed by the WTO Members.
#2179673
Ar an gcéad dul síos, mhaígh Chengxi Shipyard go bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán neamhoiriúnach le dlí EDT agus le rialuithe roimhe seo ó Chomhlacht EDT um Réiteach Díospóidí.
First, Chengxi Shipyard claimed that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is incompatible with WTO law and past WTO DSB rulings.
#2179770
Rinne Chengxi Shipyard a chuid argóintí an athuair maidir le neamhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán le dlí EDT mar a shonraítear in aithris (104) thuas, á thabhairt chun suntais go bhfuil freagra an Choimisiúin in aithris (94) agus aithris (96) an-ghinearálta agus nach mínítear go sainráite ann an bunús dlí i gComhaontuithe EDT a thacaíonn le cur i bhfeidhm Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán, de mhaolú ar an disciplín ginearálta a leagtar amach go soiléir i gcomhaontú EDT agus i rialú an Chomhlachta um Réiteach Díospóidí in DS473.
Chengxi Shipyard reiterated its arguments concerning the incompatibility of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with WTO law described in recital (104) above, pointing out that the Commission response in recitals (94) and (96) is very general and does not explain explicitly explain the legal basis in the WTO Agreements in support of application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation, derogating from the general discipline clearly set out in the WTO agreement and DSB ruling in DS473.
#2181047
Is féidir an fhaisnéis maidir leis na taraifí ceangailte a aisghabháil ó Shaoráid Íoslódála Tharaifí EDT ar http://tariffdata.wto.org/ReportersAndProducts.aspx (an dáta deireanach ar breathnaíodh air an 16 Márta 2021).
The information on the bound tariffs can be retrieved via the WTO Tariff Download Facility at http://tariffdata.wto.org/ReportersAndProducts.aspx (last viewed 16 March 2021).
#2181158
Sa bhreis air sin, maidir le comhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun Rialachán le dlí EDT, d’áitigh CCCME nach ann do choincheap an “tsaofa shuntasaigh” a áirítear le hAirteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán in aon riail de chuid EDT ADA ná CGTT 1994.
Further, concerning the WTO compatibility of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with WTO law, CCCME submitted that the concept of “significant distortions” included in Article 2(6a) of the Basic Regulation does not appear in any rule of the WTO ADA or the GATT 1994.
#2195125
Comhlíonadh EDT, lena n-áirítear:
WTO compliance, including:
#2213167
eagrú na dtoscaireachtaí idirpharlaiminteacha, na dtoscaireachtaí ad hoc, na gcoistí parlaiminteacha comhpháirteacha, na gcoistí um chomhar parlaiminteach, na dtoscaireachtaí parlaiminteacha chuig an Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála (EDT), agus na Comhdhála Parlaimintí ar EDT mar aon lena Coiste Stiúrtha,
the organisation of interparliamentary delegations, ad hoc delegations, joint parliamentary committees, parliamentary cooperation committees, parliamentary delegations to the WTO, and the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO and its Steering Committee,
#2245946
De bhun mhír 1 d’Airteagal IX de Chomhaontú EDT, déanann comhlachtaí EDT cinntí de chomhthoil de ghnáth.
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article IX of the WTO Agreement, WTO bodies usually take decisions by consensus.
#2290878
Mar a shoiléirigh Comhlacht Achomhairc na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (EDT) go sonrach in DS473, ceadaítear le dlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála sonraí ó thríú tír a úsáid, agus iad coigeartaithe go cuí nuair is gá an coigeartú sin agus nuair a bhíonn bunús leis an gcoigeartú sin.
As explicitly clarified by the WTO Appellate Body in DS473, WTO law permits the use of data from a third country, duly adjusted when such adjustment is necessary and substantiated.
#2295023
Sonraí maidir le fógra EDT i ndáil le tacaíocht intíre
Data for WTO notification of domestic support
#2295492
Tá sé de cheangal ar an Aontas fógraí áirithe a chur faoi bhráid na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (EDT) i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 18(2) de Chomhaontú na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála maidir leis an Talmhaíocht, mar a shonraítear tuilleadh i mír 4 de dhoiciméad EDT G/AG/2 an 30 Meitheamh 1995.
The Union is required to make certain notifications to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in accordance with Article 18(2) of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, as further detailed in paragraph 4 of WTO document G/AG/2 of 30 June 1995.
#2334829
I mbeagán focal, foráiltear an méid seo a leanas i rialuithe ábhartha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála:
In a nutshell, the relevant WTO rulings provide that:
#2335141
Mar sin féin, bhí rialtas na Seapáine i gcoinne na srianta onnmhairithe Indinéisigh a bhí beartaithe mar mheas sé nach raibh siad ag luí le rialacha EDT agus ba bhagairt é cás i gcoinne na hIndinéise a sheoladh ag an Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála.
However, the Japanese government was opposed to the planned Indonesian export restrictions as it considered them incompatible with WTO rules and threatened to launch a case against Indonesia at the WTO.
#2335526
Maidir le léirmhíniú fhorálacha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála agus forálacha an bhun-Rialacháin, thug an Coimisiún dá aire gur theip ar na páirtithe tagairt a dhéanamh do dhlí-eolaíocht ábhartha na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála.
With regard to the interpretation of the WTO provisions and the provisions of the basic Regulation, the Commission noted that the parties failed to refer to the relevant WTO jurisprudence.
#2335527
Comhlacht Achomhairc na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (“AB”) arna choinneáil i gcás US-Gasoline nach féidir dlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála a léamh go neamhspleách cliniciúil ón dlí idirnáisiúnta ginearálta.
The WTO Appellate Body (‘AB’) held in the US-Gasoline case that WTO law cannot be read in clinical isolation from general international law.
#2339473
Maidir leis an iarraidh go dtabharfaí míniú ní ba mhionsonraithe maidir le comhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán le dlí EDT, shonraigh an Coimisiún a sheasamh dlíthiúil go soiléir, eadhon an gnáthluach a ríomh i gcás inar suíodh gurb ann do shaobhadh suntasach de bhun 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán, is rud é sin atá i gcomhréir le dlí EDT, lena n-áirítear forálacha ábhartha Airteagal 2.2 agus Airteagal 2.2.1.1. ADA mar aon le tuarascálacha ar réiteach díospóide EDT, go háirithe D473.
As to the request for additional elaboration on the compatibility of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with WTO law, the Commission clearly stated its legal position, namely that constructing the normal value in a situation where the existence of significant distortions pursuant to 2(6a) of the basic Regulation has been established, is in line with WTO law, including with the relevant provisions of Article 2.2 and Article 2.2.1.1 ADA, as well as with WTO dispute settlement reports, in particular in DS473.
#2339995
Tar éis an nochta chinntithigh, d’áitigh Ketong ar dtús, nár chuir an Coimisiún aon mhíniú breise ar fáil fós maidir leis an mbunús dlí beacht nó chun bunús a thabhairt lena réasúnú dlíthiúil i ndáil le comhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán le comhaontuithe EDT agus le rialú EDT in DS473.
Upon definitive disclosure, Ketong argued, first, that the Commission still failed to provide any further elaboration concerning the exact legal basis or to underpin its legal reasoning in relation to the compatibility of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with the WTO agreements and the WTO ruling in DS473. According to Ketong, the Commission’s mere reiteration that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is fully in line with the EU’s obligations under the WTO law did not provide any additional clarity on the issue. Second, Ketong reiterated that data from a third country in normal value construction on the ground of alleged existence of significant distortions is incompatible with the Article 2.2 and Article 2.2.1.1 ADA and the WTO Appellate Body’s ruling in DS473.
#2346134
Go sonrach, d’áitigh Liaoning Dantan (i) nár thug an Coimisiún, gan ach athrá a dhéanamh air go bhfuil Airteagal 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán comhoiriúnach do EDT, aon mhionsaothrú breise a chur ar fáil maidir leis an mbunús dlí beacht lena bhforáiltear do chomhoiriúnacht Airteagal 2(6a) le dlí EDT agus (ii) nár tugadh aon mhíniú maidir leis an gcuid sin de Phrótacal Aontachais na Síne a mheastar a bheith i bhfeidhm i gcónaí, gan trácht ar an réasúnaíocht chun tacú leis an tuairim sin.
More specifically, Liaoning Dantan argued that (i) the Commission, by merely repeating that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is WTO compatible, failed to provide any further elaboration concerning the exact legal basis providing for the compatibility of Article 2(6a) with WTO law; and (ii) no explanation was provided concerning which part of Section 15 of China’s Accession Protocol to the WTO is considered to continue to apply, let alone the reasoning to support this view.
#2346656
Ada, chomh maith leis na torthaí in DS473, d’athdhearbhaigh an Coimisiún a thuairim in aithris (54) den Rialachán sealadach, agus san aithris, go bhfuil 2(6a) den bhun-Rialachán go hiomlán i gcomhréir le hoibleagáidí an AE faoi dhlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála agus go gceadaítear le dlí na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála, arna léirmhíniú ag Painéal na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála agus ag an gComhlacht Achomhairc in DS473, sonraí ó thríú tír a úsáid, agus iad coigeartaithe go cuí nuair a bheidh gá le coigeartú den sórt sin agus nuair a bheidh bunús leis an gcoigeartú sin.
ADA, as well as the findings in DS473, the Commission reiterated its view expressed in recital (54) of the provisional Regulation, as well as in recital (56), that 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is fully in line with the EU’s obligations under WTO law and that WTO law, as interpreted by the WTO Panel and the Appellate Body in DS473, allows the use of data from a third country, duly adjusted when such adjustment is necessary and substantiated.
#2355129
Is tíortha i mbéal forbartha iad tíortha áirithe CCE agus is comhaltaí den Eagraíocht Dhomhanda Trádála iad, dá bhrí sin, is féidir leo tairbhe a bhaint as eisiaimh ‘tír i mbéal forbartha’, nuair a chomhlíontar na coinníollacha ábhartha i gcomhréir le rialacha an Aontais Eorpaigh agus na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála.
Certain EPA countries are developing countries and WTO members, therefore they can benefit from ‘developing country’ exclusions, when the relevant conditions are met, in line with EU and WTO rules.
#2361024
Ar an gcéad dul síos, ní gá do Chomhaltaí EDT téarmaí cruinne Chomhaontuithe EDT a úsáid ina reachtaíocht cur chun feidhme.
First, there is no need for WTO Members to use the exact terms of the WTO Agreements in their implementing legislation.
#2361030
I ndáil le cás an Aontais – Coigeartaithe Costas Modheolaíochtaí II (An Rúis) (DS 494), meabhraíonn an Coimisiún go ndearna an tAontas agus Cónaidhm na Rúise araon achomharc i gcoinne thorthaí an Phainéil, ní críochnaitheach na torthaí sin agus dá bhrí sin, i gcomhréir le cásdlí EDT, níl stádas dlíthiúil acu i gcóras EDT, ó tharla nár fhormhuinigh an Comhlacht um Réiteach Díospóidí iad le cinntí ó Chomhaltaí EDT.
In relation to the case EU – Cost Adjustment Methodologies II (Russia) (DS 494), the Commission recalled that both the EU and the Russian Federation appealed the findings of the Panel, which are not final and therefore, according to standing WTO case-law, have no legal status in the WTO system, since they have not been endorsed by the Dispute Settlement Body through a decision by the WTO Members.
#2396356
Cuirfidh an painéal san áireamh freisin léirithe ábhartha i dtuarascálacha ó Phainéil na hEagraíochta Dhomhanda Trádála (EDT) agus ón mBuanchomhlacht Achomhairc arna nglacadh ag Comhlacht EDT um Réiteach Díospóidí.
The panel shall also take into account relevant interpretations in reports of World Trade Organization (WTO) panels and the Appellate Body adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO.
#2396360
Beidh an luach saothair i gcomhréir le caighdeáin EDT;
The remuneration shall be in accordance with WTO standards;
#2402995
De bhun Airteagail IV:1 agus IX:1 de Chomhaontú EDT, is féidir le Comhdháil Aireachta na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála (EDT) cinntí a ghlacadh de chomhthoil.
Pursuant to Articles IV:1 and IX:1 of the WTO Agreement, the Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is able to adopt decisions by consensus.
#2403010
Is é an seasamh atá le glacadh thar ceann an Aontais laistigh de 12ú Comhdháil Aireachta na hEagraíochta Domhanda Trádála tacú le glacadh dréachtchinntí aireachta EDT maidir le:
The position to be taken on the Union’s behalf within the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference shall be to support the adoption of the draft WTO ministerial decisions on: