汉译英,拒绝机翻上诉庭最终结论：上诉庭建议,既然专家小组和上诉庭都确认巴西的补贴措施不符合《反补贴协议》的规定,DSB应要求巴西在90日内取消它根据PROEX计划向国产飞机提供的出口补

汉译英,拒绝机翻上诉庭最终结论：上诉庭建议,既然专家小组和上诉庭都确认巴西的补贴措施不符合《反补贴协议》的规定,DSB应要求巴西在90日内取消它根据PROEX计划向国产飞机提供的出口补
汉译英,拒绝机翻
上诉庭最终结论：
上诉庭建议,既然专家小组和上诉庭都确认巴西的补贴措施不符合《反补贴协议》的规定,DSB应要求巴西在90日内取消它根据PROEX计划向国产飞机提供的出口补贴.
1999年8月双方就执行专家小组和上诉庭报告达成了协议.1999年11月19日,巴西通知说它已经在90日内履行了专家小组建议.11月23日,加拿大要求成立专家小组,确认巴西并未执行专家小组建议.1999年12月9日,DSB决定由原专家小组对这一问题做出结论.澳大利亚、欧盟和美国保留第三方权利.2000年5月2日,专家小组确认,巴西宣称符合专家小组报告的措施或者根本不存在,或者仍不符合专家小组报告的要求.

汉译英,拒绝机翻上诉庭最终结论：上诉庭建议,既然专家小组和上诉庭都确认巴西的补贴措施不符合《反补贴协议》的规定,DSB应要求巴西在90日内取消它根据PROEX计划向国产飞机提供的出口补
Conclusion:the final appeal court
However,since the expert group and the appeal court confirm Brazil subsidies countervailing measures does not conform to the provisions of the agreement shall be required in Brazil,DSB within 90 days cancel it according to the domestic plane provides PROEX plan of export subsidies.
In August 1999,the execution team of experts and appeals court report reached an agreement.On November 19,1999,Brazil notice says it has performed in 90 days expert group suggested.On November 23,Canada requires that Brazil founded team of experts,and did not execute team of experts suggest.On Dec.9,1999 by the DSB expert panel decision on this issue.Australia,the European Union and the third party rights reserved.On May 2nd 2000,expert group,Brazil declared conform to the expert group report measures or doesn't exist,or still do not conform to the requirements of the expert group report.

The Court of Appeal the final conclusions:
The Court of Appeal suggested that since the expert group and the Court of Appeal has confirmed that Brazil's subsidies are not in line with the "ant...

全部展开

The Court of Appeal the final conclusions:
The Court of Appeal suggested that since the expert group and the Court of Appeal has confirmed that Brazil's subsidies are not in line with the "anti-subsidy agreement",Brazil requested the DSB to 90 days in accordance with its PROEX canceled plans to export China-made aircraft subsidies.
The two sides in August 1999 on the implementation of the Panel of Experts report and the Court of Appeal agreed.November 19, 1999, Brazil has been notified that it had 90 days to fulfill the recommendations of the Expert Group.November 23, Canada called for the establishment of an expert group confirmed that Brazil did not implement recommendations of the Expert Group.December 9, 1999, DSB decisions by the original group of experts on this issue to conclusion. Australia, the European Union and the United States to retain the rights of third parties.May 2, 2000, the panel confirmed that Brazil with the expert group report measures or non-existent, or is not in line with the report of the Panel of Experts.

收起

The Court of Appeal the final conclusions:
The Court of Appeal suggested that since the expert group and the Court of Appeal has confirmed that Brazil's subsidies are not in line with the "anti-s...

全部展开

The Court of Appeal the final conclusions:
The Court of Appeal suggested that since the expert group and the Court of Appeal has confirmed that Brazil's subsidies are not in line with the "anti-subsidy agreement" provides, DSB, upon request, in Brazil 90 days to abolish it PROEX According to the plan to export China-made aircraft subsidies.
The two sides in August 1999 on the implementation of the Panel of Experts report and the Court of Appeal agreed. November 19, 1999, Brazil has been notified that it had 90 days to fulfill the recommendations of the Expert Group. November 23, Canada called for the establishment of an expert group confirmed that Brazil did not implement recommendations of the Expert Group. December 9, 1999, DSB decisions by the original group of experts on this issue to conclusion. Australia, the European Union and the United States to retain the rights of third parties. May 2, 2000, the panel confirmed that Brazil with the expert group report measures or non-existent, or is not in line with the report of the Panel of Experts.

收起

The final conclusion of the Appellate Body:
Considering both the expert group and the Appellate Body confirmed that Brazil's subsidy measures didn't conform with the SCM Agreement, the Appellate ...

全部展开

The final conclusion of the Appellate Body:
Considering both the expert group and the Appellate Body confirmed that Brazil's subsidy measures didn't conform with the SCM Agreement, the Appellate Body suggested that DSB should request Brazil to abolish its export subsidies for domestic aircraft, within 90 days, which were provided based on PROEX Program.
In August,1999, both sides reached an agreement on the implementation of the reports of the expert group and the Apppellate Body. On November 19,1999, Brazil notified that it had implemented the expert group's recommendations. On November 23, an expert group was set up at the request of Canada, and confirmed that Brazil had not implemented the recommendatios mentioned above. On December 9, DSB requested the original expert group to make a conclusion on this issue. Australia, EU and the U.S. reserved the third party rights. On May 2,2000, the expert group confirmed that the measures which Brazil alleged were consistent with the expert group report didn't exist at all, or could still not meet the requirements of the expert group report.
WTO中,上诉庭的英文为 Appellate Body, <<反补贴协议>>是简称,英文缩写为SCM Agreement.这些可在google中查到.

收起