This dispute, brought by Canada against the United States, constitutes another chapter in three separate sagas: the enduring softwood lumber dispute between the two North American nations; the debate over the acceptability of the practice of “zeroing”; and the fight over the value and role of World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body precedent. Notably, the panel departed from established Appellate Body decisions finding, inter alia, that zeroing was permissible under a weighted average-to-transaction (W-T) methodology. This departure is remarkable, not just because it runs counter to prior jurisprudence, but also for the reasoning supporting it and the circumstances in which it occurred. Indeed, the Panel Report was issued in the midst of a crisis of the WTO dispute settlement system arising from the United States’ decision to block the reappointment of Appellate Body members. The United States justified this action, which eventually resulted in the Appellate Body losing its quorum to hear new appeals on December 10, 2019, on the basis of complaints, among others, that the Appellate Body had championed an approach to precedent that the United States found incompatible with the intended role of dispute settlement within the WTO. While members worked feverishly to formulate a compromise that might respond to the United States’ criticisms and soften the effect of the Appellate Body's approach, the Panel suggested its own. Thus, it found room to depart from prior precedent (which the United States argued had been wrongly decided) while paying lip service to the Appellate Body.

中文翻译：

---

美国——对来自加拿大的软木采用差别定价法的反倾销措施

加拿大针对美国提起的这场争端构成了三个独立传奇的另一章：两个北美国家之间持久的软木木材争端；关于“归零”做法的可接受性的辩论；以及关于世界贸易组织 (WTO) 上诉机构先例的价值和作用的斗争。值得注意的是，专家组偏离了既定的上诉机构决定，除其他外，在加权平均交易 (WT) 方法下允许归零。这种背离是显着的，不仅因为它与先前的判例背道而驰，还因为支持它的推理和它发生的情况。确实，专家组报告是在美国决定阻止上诉机构成员连任的决定引发的 WTO 争端解决系统危机中发布的。美国为这一行动辩护，最终导致上诉机构失去其在 2019 年 12 月 10 日审理新上诉的法定人数，理由是上诉机构支持美国对先例的处理方法等。发现与 WTO 内争端解决的预期作用不相容。虽然成员们狂热地努力制定一个妥协方案，以回应美国的批评并软化上诉机构方法的影响，但专家组提出了自己的建议。因此，