GD/43
Italy - Discrimination Against Imported Agricultural Machinery
Other titles
Italy Agricultural Machinery (Source: GATT Analytical Index)
Products at Issue
| Products at issue |
Agricultural machinery
|
| Type of product |
Non-agricultural
|
| Product sub-type |
Machinery; electrical and electronic equipment
|
Related disputes
| GATT | |
| WTO |
Key legal aspects
| Legal basis |
|
| Claims raised |
|
| Defences raised |
|
Adjudicators
| Type | Panel for conciliation |
| Chairperson | |
| Other members | J. H. Warren (Canada), O. Benes (Czechoslovakia), J. Hoogwater (Netherlands), Johan Cappelen (Norway) |
| Type | Panel for conciliation |
| Legal basis at issue |
|
| Claims at issue |
|
| Defences at issue |
|
| No of Pages (total / legal reasoning) | 8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timeline
| Request for consultations | |
| Request for establishment | |
| Establishment | |
| Composition | |
| Report | |
| Adoption of report | |
| Mutually agreed solution |
Outcome
| Outcome of the proceedings |
Report adopted, mutually agreed solution
|
| Additional Info | L/833 (15/07/1958) United Kingdom Complaint on Italian Discrimination against Imported Agricultural Machinery - Report by the Panel for Conciliation: The Panel examined the complaint of the United Kingdom Government (L/649) that certain provisions of the Italian Law No. 949 of 25 July 1952, which provides special credit facilities to some categories of farmers or farmers' co-operatives for the purchase of agricultural machinery produced in Italy, were inconsistent with the obligations of Italy under GATT Article III. The Panel considered that, as the credit facilities provided under the Italian Law were not available to the purchasers of imported tractors and other agricultural machinery, these products did not enjoy the equality of treatment which should be accorded to them and resulted in discrimination inconsistent with the provisions of GATT Article III. The provisions of Article III:8(b) were not applicable to this particular case since the credit facilities provided were granted to the purchasers of agricultural machinery and could not be considered as subsidies accorded to the producers of agricultural machinery. On the basis of the statistics presented by the parties and the explanations given, the Panel came to the conclusion that the falling off in imports of tractors from the United Kingdom could not entirely be attributed to the operation of the credit facilities. However, these credit facilities had probably influenced a number of purchasers in the selection of the tractors which they purchased. The Panel suggested that the Contracting Parties recommend that the Italian Government consider the desirability of eliminating within a reasonable time the adverse effects on imports of agricultural machinery of the provisions of Law No. 949 by making available to the farmers and co-operatives eligible under that Law the same credit facilities for the purchase of agricultural machinery imported from other contracting parties as were now provided for the purchase of domestically produced agricultural machinery, or by other appropriate means. |