GD/168
Canada - Measures Affecting Exports of Unprocessed Herring and Salmon
Other titles
Canada Herring and Salmon (Source: GATT Analytical Index)
Products at Issue
| Products at issue |
Herring and salmon
|
| Type of product |
Non-agricultural
|
| Product sub-type |
Fish and fish products
|
Related disputes
| GATT | |
| WTO |
Key legal aspects
| Legal basis |
|
| Claims raised |
|
| Defences raised |
|
Adjudicators
| Type | Panel |
| Chairperson | János Nyerges (Hungary) |
| Other members | Timothy Groser (New Zealand), Arne Sivertsen (Norway) |
| Type | Panel |
| Legal basis at issue |
|
| Claims at issue |
|
| Defences at issue |
|
| No of Pages (total / legal reasoning) | 16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timeline
| Request for consultations |
|
| Request for establishment | |
| Establishment | |
| Composition | |
| Report | |
| Adoption of report |
Outcome
| Outcome of the proceedings |
Report adopted
|
| Additional Info | L/6268 (20/11/1987) Canada – Measures Affecting Exports of Unprocessed Herring and Salmon – Report of the Panel: The parties to the dispute and the Panel agreed that Canada's prohibitions on exports of unprocessed herring and salmon are contrary to Article XI:1 of the General Agreement. Canada invoked two exceptions: first, Article XI:2(b) permitting "export prohibitions ... necessary to the application of standards or regulations for the classification, grading or marketing of commodities in international trade" and, second, Article XX(g) permitting any measure "relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources ... made effective in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production or consumption". Regarding the exception in Article XI:2(b), the Panel noted that Canada prohibited exports even if they could meet the standards generally applied to fish exported from Canada. The Panel therefore found that these export prohibitions could not be considered as "necessary" to the application of standards within the meaning of Article XI:2(b). The Panel also rejected Canada's contention that the prohibition of exports was necessary for the international marketing of processed salmon and herring. Regarding the exception in Article XX(g), the Panel agreed with the parties that salmon and herring stocks are "exhaustible natural resources" and the harvest limitations "restrictions on domestic production" within the meaning of Article XX(g). The Panel then examined whether the measures are "relating to" the conservation of salmon and herring stocks and whether they are made effective "in conjunction with" the restrictions on the harvesting of salmon and herring. The Panel concluded that, while a trade measure did not have to be necessary or essential to the conservation of an exhaustible natural resource, it had to be primarily aimed at the conservation of an exhaustible natural resource to be considered as "relating to" conservation within the meaning of Article XX(g). The Panel, similarly, considered that the terms "in conjunction with" in Article XX(g) had to be interpreted in a way that ensures that the scope of possible actions under that provision corresponds to the purpose for which it was included in the General Agreement. The Panel found that these prohibitions could not be deemed to be primarily aimed at the conservation of salmon and herring stocks and at rendering effective the restrictions or the harvesting of these fish, and therefore concluded that the export prohibitions were not justified by Article XX(g). The Panel therefore suggested that the contracting parties recommend that Canada bring its measures affecting exports of certain unprocessed salmon and unprocessed herring into conformity with the General Agreement. |