NAFTA

Miguel ngel Romn Pieyro

A01121495
NAFTA
The North American Free Trade Agreement is an
agreement signed by Canada, Mexico, and
the United States, creating a trilateral rules-
basedtrade bloc in North America.

The agreement came into force on January 1, 1994.
It superseded the CanadaUnited States Free Trade
Agreement between the U.S. and Canada.
CONTENTS
Preamble

Part One: General Part

Part Two: Trade in Goods

Part Three: Technical Barriers to Trade

Part Four: Government Procurement

Part Five: Investment, Services and Related Matters

Part Six: Intellectual Property

Part Seven: Administrative and Institutional Provisions

Part Eight: Other Provisions


Institutions
Free Trade Commission

The Secretariat

Cooperation

GATT Dispute Settlement

Consultations

Initiation of Procedures
Consultations Commission
Request for an
Arbitral Panel
Panel Selection
Procedures figures
Third Party Participation

Role of Experts

Scientific Review Boards

Procedure
Initial
Report

(a) request the views of any participating Party;
(b) reconsider its report;
(c) make any further examination that it
considers appropriate.

14
days
Final
Report
30 days
After the procedure
Implementation of Final Report

Non-Implementation-Suspension of Benefits
Case 1
-Some Hot Rolled Carbon Steel Plate
Originating in or Exported from Mexico
-rules of procedure for artcle 1904
-Canadian secretary
Parties involved
Claimant : Altos Hornos de Mxico, S.A. de C.V.
("AHMSA"), a mexican exporting company wich goods
were sbject of revition at 29 of december 1997.
Party subject of the claim: Canadian International
Trade Tribunal or CIT
Others: ( Stelco Inc., Algoma Steel Inc. and IPSCO)

Previos ISSUE
The claimant has problems with the final decition made by the Canadian
International Trade tribunal for some supposed judicial mistakes in a
resolution that was published in the Canadian Gazette

-The award said that the hot steel carbon rods from several countries (the
peoples republic of China, The REPUBLIC of South Africa the Russian
Federation and of course MEXICO were threatening to damage the
national industry of CANADA.

At the arbitral panel canadas tribunal issued
a Corrigendum to fix mistakes on their of
their award

Mexico challenged this by claiming they
deserved an indiviudal award.
Panels resolution
The new resolution was in acordance to
what the panel asked and therefore wasnt a
new resolution and didnt have to make an
individual award for mexico.

The binational panel decided that the
corrigendum was fair and they couldnt study
sustantive matters (unanimous)

Case2
Pipes coming from mexico final resolution regarding the selling of
goods under a fair price.

*Parties involved
Tubos de Acero S.A de C.V TAMSA as the only claimant of this
case.
International Trade Administration (The authority that ruled the
resolution that is being fought out)
North Star Steel ohio and North Star Steel Company
Law:735 of the Tarrif Act of 1930


issue
The issue being wheter or no mexico was
selling goods under the normal market
value and ergo having the competition at a
disadvantage.

Case study
Tamsa was asked to fill a questionary
Tamsa claimed they had remaining goods
from a previous deal with an arab countries,
Tamsa doesnt fill on time the questionaries
Tamsas methodology is rejected by the
panel
Panels resolution
1.-The panel orders the North American Department of
Commerce to give a new revolution resolution.
2.-The department must give an adequate time to North Star
and Tamsa to make any nessesary coments regarding this new
resoltution
3.- The new resolution was due in 90 at the time of the order.
4.- They decline TAMSAS objections