first case in which complaints werefiled against China’s trade remedy measures
under the dispute settlement mechanism, as well as thefirst“fruitless”case.
Third, among six cases in which complaints werefiled against China,five cases
involved thefield of trade in goods and one case involved trade in services and
intellectual property protection, covering three major WTO tradefields. With
respect to trade in goods, specific measures against which complaints werefiled
included not only trade remedy measures but also export measures, and complaints
ultimately directed at China’s industrial policy and the Chinese Government’s trade
control act. The“Raw material case”and the“Rare earth case”were the only two
cases in which complaints werefiled against products exported from the defendant
and which were accepted by the dispute settlement body for handling. Among the
six cases, one case was at the stage of hearing by the expert panel, one case was
fruitless, one case was closed with amicable settlement, and two cases were con-
cluded with China as the losing party. On February 26, 2013, the report by the
expert panel on the“Security inspection equipment case”was circulated, while the
expert panel believed that China’s measures were inconsistent with WTO rules.
6.2.2.3 Overall Characteristics
First, six cases among nine cases between China and the EU involved the
China-specific obligation clause.^16 This indicated that at the current stage, specific
obligations undertaken at the time of China’s accession to the WTO were still the
main sources for bilateral trade disputes and directions for major attacks by the EU;
the“generalization”of the WTO rules had not yet been realized in China-EU trade
relations.
Second, cases in which the EUfiled complaints have decreased compared with
cases in which complaints werefiled against the EU, and the total number of cases
to which the EU was a party also declined after 2006. The EU’s enthusiasm for
using the dispute settlement mechanism has abated compared with that of ten years
ago, but it has become increasingly interested in China. Meanwhile, China’s
enthusiasm for using the dispute settlement mechanism has steadily increased. Of
(^16) For example, the“auto parts case”involved Paragraph 93 (Completely Knocked-down Kit) of
theReport of the Working Party; the“financial information service case”involved Paragraph 309
(Independent Supervision) of theReport of the Working Party,“acquired rights”in horizontal
commitments in Schedule of Concessions in Services; the“raw materials case”involved Paragraph
3 (Cancellation of Export Taxes and Dues), Article 11 of theProtocol on China’s Accession to the
WTO; the“rare earth case”involved Subparagraph 2(A)2 (Unified Implementation), Subparagraph
2(C)1 (Transparency), Subparagraph 5 (Right to Trade), Subparagraph 7.2 (Non-tariff Measures),
Subparagraph 8.2 (Import and Export Licensing Procedure) and Subparagraph 11.3 (Cancellation
of Export Taxes and Dues) in Part One of the Protocol on China’s Accession to the WTO, and
Paragraph 83, Paragraph 84, Paragraph 162, etc. of theReport of the Working Party; the“fastener
case”involved Paragraph 15 (Surrogate Country Price) of theProtocol on China’s Accession to
the WTO; the“leather shoes case”involved Paragraph 15 (Surrogate Country Price) of the
Protocol on China’s Accession to the WTO.
6 China-EU Relations in the Context of Global Trade Governance 127