Canada had been used in the previous investigations.

The investigation confirmed that all bicycles are sold through similar distribution channels on the Community market.

The investigation confirmed that Canada should be used as an analogue country because:

However, during the investigation, the Commission verified that Canadian and US market prices still made it possible for other producers to make profits in normal trade transactions.

For evaluating against Canadian requirements, the European CABs shall establish the conclusions of the examination and submit to Health Canada an abbreviated supporting report and certificate of compliance which includes such conclusions.

As to market perception of the Brazilian imported products and the Community produced products, the investigation has confirmed that there is no difference, as evidenced also by the aforementioned similarities found in the distribution channels.

The investigation confirmed the complainant's legal claim that the C-57 Amendment to the Canadian Trade- Marks Act violates Articles 23.1 and 2 as well as Article 24.3 (the so-called standstill clause) of TRIPS and that such infringements cannot be justified on the basis of the exception under Article 24.6 of TRIPS.

The methodology used to determine the amount of the adjustment was the same as in the previous investigation, i.e. for transport within Belarus and Russia data relating to transport costs in Canada were taken, while transport costs from the border of the producing country to the Community border, where applicable, were determined on the basis of the costs reported by IPC.

Indeed, the investigation showed that, in all cases, the imported products and those of the Community industry have the same physical and technical characteristics, that the pricing trends are similar, significantly undercutting the Community industry's prices, and that all imported products as well as the Community-produced products are sold through the same or similar channels of distribution.

From the above, it was concluded that, in the absence of measures, prices of Japanese exporting producers could at least remain at the current levels found on the Community market which are significantly lower than those of the Community industry and could even potentially fall to levels comparable to the prices for imports originating in Japan into the US, Canadian and Latin-American markets or to the level of prices found in the original investigation.

As in the previous investigations, it was established that, since there were no differences in the physical and chemical properties of the different types and qualities of potash, potash produced in Canada, which was chosen as analogue country (see Chapter 4.2) and sold on the North American market, is a like product to that exported to the Community from the countries concerned, in the sense of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

Indeed, since the imposition of safeguard measures across a broad range of steel products by the US in March 2002, the European Community and many countries (including Bulgaria, Canada, China, the Czech Republic, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico and Poland) concerned by the possible impact of those and earlier measures on the world steel market, have initiated safeguard investigations relating to a range of steel products.