Environmental Cases Under the GATT

Maggio, Amber Rose

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61155-6_6

Amber Rose Maggio²⁰

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((EYIELMONO,volume 1))

564 Accesses

Abstract

Until the late 1980s, even as the environmental movement was growing in all the industrial countries, it was only sporadically suggested that the concerns of environmentalists and conservationists were in conflict with the objectives with the GATT and related movements to reduce trade barriers. It was occasionally suggested that trade contributes to economic growth, that increased economic activity leads to increased pollution, and therefore that trade is bad and so are rules discouraging or forbidding restrictions on trade. But on the whole these suggestions did not win favour.

As mentioned previously, a strict doctrine of precedent does not exist within the WTO (as elsewhere in international law), but there is significant value given to the reports by both the DSS, in any future reports covering the same issue, and the States, which may choose to rely on such reports when enacting policy. Therefore, any assessment of the issue of NPR PPMs and environmental policy under the WTO necessitates an evaluation of the relevant case law to date.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 79.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 99.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 139.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (Oxford, 2002), 314.
2.
See supra, Chap. 3 and James K. R. Watson, The WTO and the Environment: Development of Competence Beyond Trade (Oxford, 2013), 84–88.
3.
Watson (note 2), 84.
4.
Lowenfeld (note 1), 314.
5.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 2.7 (unadopted).
6.
Ibid., para. 2.2.
7.
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407.
8.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 2.5 (unadopted).
9.
Ibid., para. 2.7.
10.
Ibid., para. 2.7–2.8.
11.
Ibid., para. 2.8.
12.
Ibid. Also at issue in this case were exports into the US from ‘intermediary nations’: ibid., para. 2.10.
13.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 2.12 (unadopted).
14.
Ibid.
15.
Ibid. Under the WTO, labelling is now an issue covered by the TBT Agreement and will be dealt with below in Chaps. 7–8.
16.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 3.1 (a) (unadopted).
17.
Ibid., para. 3.1 (b).
18.
Ibid., para. 3.3.
19.
Ibid., para. 3.6.
20.
Ibid., para. 3.11.
21.
Ibid., para. 3.8.
22.
Ibid., para. 3.33.
23.
Ibid., para. 5.2.
24.
Ibid., para. 5.7.
25.
See supra.
26.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 5.7 (unadopted).
27.
Ibid., para. 5.10 (emphasis added).
28.
See ibid., paras. 5.11–5.15.
29.
Ibid., para. 5.15.
30.
Ibid.
31.
Ibid., paras. 5.17–5.19.
32.
Ibid., para. 5.22.
33.
Ibid.
34.
Ibid., para. 5.25.
35.
See the history of the GATT/Havana Charter in Sect. 3.2.
36.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, (unadopted), 5.25–5.26.
37.
Ibid., para. 5.27.
38.
Ibid., para. 5.28.
39.
Ibid.
40.
Ibid., para. 5.33.
41.
Ibid., para. 5.35–5.40.
42.
Section 8 of the Fishermen’s Protective Act (Pelly Amendment) P.L. 92-219 (85 Stat. 786).
43.
GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna (Tuna/Dolphin I), DS21/R 1991, para. 5.21 (unadopted).
44.
Ibid., para. 5.43.
45.
Ibid., para 6.1.
46.
Ibid., para. 6.2.
47.
Ibid.
48.
Ibid.
49.
Ibid., para. 6.3.
50.
Ibid.
51.
Although there were some developments in the interim period, see GATT Panel Report United States – Restrictions on the Import of Tuna, DS29/R 1994, paras. 2.1–2.15 (unadopted).
52.
Ibid., paras. 5.1–5.11.
53.
Ibid., para. 5.11.
54.
Ibid.
55.
Ibid., para. 5.9.
56.
Ibid., para. 5.10.
57.
Ibid., para. 5.20.
58.
Ibid., para. 5.27.
59.
Ibid., para. 5.28.
60.
Ibid., para. 5.33.
61.
Ibid., para. 5.39.
62.
Ibid., para. 5.42.
63.
Ibid.
64.
Ibid.
65.
Appellate Body Report Japan –Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, pg. 14–15.
66.
Carol J. Beyers, The U.S./Mexico Tuna Embargo Dispute: a Case Study of the GATT and Environmental Progress, Maryland JIL 16 (2) (1992), 229, 246.
67.
Nathalie Bernasconi-Osterwalder/Daniel Magraw/Maria Julia Olivia/Morcos Orellana/Elizabeth Tuerk, Environment and Trade: A Guide to WTO Jurisprudence (London, 2006), 203.
68.
Panel Report, United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 2.1.
69.
Following the Clean Air Act with regard to reformulated gasoline: ‘The oxygen content must not be less than 2.0 percent by weight, the benzene content must not exceed 1.0 percent by volume and the gasoline must be free of heavy metals, including lead or manganese. The performance specifications of the CAA require a 15 percent reduction in the emissions of both volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”) and toxic air pollutants (“toxics”) and no increase in emissions of nitrogen oxides (“NOx”). These requirements are measured by comparing the performance of reformulated gasoline in baseline vehicles (representative model year 1990 vehicles) against the performance of “baseline gasoline” in such vehicles’, ibid., para. 2.3. ‘Conventional gasoline’ was also subject to ‘anti-dumping rules’ to prevent ‘refiners, blenders or importers from dumping into conventional gasoline fuel components that are restricted in reformulated gasoline and that cause environmentally harmful emissions’, ibid., para. 2.4.
70.
Ibid., para. 2.2.
71.
Ibid.
72.
Ibid., para. 2.5.
73.
Ibid., para. 2.7.
74.
Ibid., para. 2.9.
75.
Ibid., para. 2.9.
76.
Ibid., para. 2.11.
77.
Ibid., para. 2.13.
78.
Ibid., para. 3.1.
79.
Ibid., para. 3.5.
80.
Ibid., para. 3.6.
81.
Ibid., para. 3.8.
82.
And later with also with regard to Art. III:1, see ibid., paras. 3.34–3.36.
83.
Ibid., para. 3.12.
84.
Ibid., para. 3.17.
85.
Ibid., para. 3.18.
86.
Ibid.
87.
Ibid., para. 3.37.
88.
Ibid., para. 3.39.
89.
Ibid., para. 3.40–3.44.
90.
Ibid., 3.45.
91.
Ibid., para. 3.55.
92.
Ibid., para. 3.56–3.57.
93.
Ibid., para. 3.59.
94.
Ibid., para. 3.60.
95.
Ibid., para. 3.65.
96.
Ibid., para. 3.67.
97.
Ibid., para. 3.69
98.
Ibid., para. 3.70.
99.
Ibid., para. 6.5.
100.
Ibid., para. 6.9.
101.
Ibid., para. 6.10.
102.
Ibid., paras. 6.11–6.13.
103.
GATT Panel Report United States – Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, para. 5.14; Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.14.
104.
Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, paras. 6.14–6.16.
105.
GATT Panel Report United States — Measures Affecting Alcoholic and Malt Beverages, para. 5.2; Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.17.
106.
Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, paras. 6.18–6.19.
107.
Ibid., para. 6.21.
108.
Ibid., para. 6.22.
109.
GATT Panel Report United States – Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, para. 5.26.
110.
GATT Panel Report Thailand – Restrictions on Importation and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, para. 75; Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.24.
111.
Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.28.
112.
Ibid., paras. 6.28–6.29.
113.
Ibid., paras. 6.30–6.31.
114.
Ibid., paras. 6.37.
115.
GATT Panel Report Canada – Measures Affecting Exports of Unprocessed Herring and Salmon, para. 4.6; Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.39–6.40.
116.
Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, para. 6.40.
117.
Ibid., para. 6.41.
118.
Appellate Body Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, pg. 9.
119.
Ibid., pg. 14.
120.
Ibid., pg. 16.
121.
Ibid.
122.
Ibid.
123.
Ibid.
124.
Ibid.
125.
Ibid., pg. 15.
126.
‘“necessary” – in paragraphs (a), (b) and (d); “essential” – in paragraph (j); “relating to” – in paragraphs (c), (e) and (g); “for the protection of” – in paragraph (f); “in pursuance of” – in paragraph (h); and “involving” – in paragraph (i)’, ibid., pg. 17.
127.
Ibid., pg. 18.
128.
Ibid., pg. 19.
129.
Ibid., pg. 19.
130.
Ibid., pg. 20. A requirement that the Appellate Body refers to later as a requirement for ‘even-handedness’, ibid., pg. 21.
131.
Ibid., pg. 21.
132.
Ibid., pg. 22.
133.
Ibid., pg. 22–23.
134.
Ibid., pg. 28.
135.
Ibid., pg. 29.
136.
See http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=91 for recent consumption comparator; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html (last accessed on 05/03/2017).
137.
While for the most part, the arguments of India, Pakistan and Thailand were given together, and Malaysia separately, here the word ‘complainants’ without differentiation is generally preferred as it is not operative who put forward the specific argument.
138.
Under: ‘Section 609 of U.S. Public Law 101-1621 (“Section 609”) and the “Revised Notice of Guidelines for Determining Comparability of Foreign Programs for the Protection of Turtles in Shrimp Trawl Fishing Operations”’: Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 1.
139.
Ibid., paras. 1–2.
140.
Ibid., para. 17.
141.
Ibid., para. 18.
142.
Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, Suriname, French Guyana, and Brazil, ibid.
143.
Ibid., para. 22.
144.
Ibid., para. 24.
145.
Ibid., para. 140.
146.
Ibid.
147.
Ibid., para. 27.
148.
Ibid.
149.
Ibid., para. 29.
150.
Ibid., paras. 31–32.
151.
Ibid., para. 32.
152.
Ibid., paras. 33–34.
153.
Ibid., para. 36.
154.
Ibid., paras. 37–38.
155.
Ibid., para. 38.
156.
Ibid., paras. 38–42.
157.
Ibid., para. 41.
158.
Ibid., para. 45.
159.
Ibid.
160.
Ibid., para. 62.
161.
Ibid.
162.
Ibid., para. 105.
163.
Ibid., para. 162.
164.
Ibid.; see supra, 6.2 and 6.3.
165.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 162.
166.
Ibid., para. 163.
167.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 169, quoting Appellate Body Report United States – Measure Affecting Imports of Woven Wool Shirts and Blouses from India, pg. 16.
168.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 169.
169.
Ibid.
170.
Ibid., para. 170.
171.
Ibid., para. 171.
172.
Ibid., para. 174.
173.
Ibid., para. 183.
174.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 183.
175.
Ibid.
176.
Ibid., para. 185–186.
177.
Ibid., para. 187.
178.
Ibid.
179.
Panel Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline; GATT Panel Report Canada – Measures Affecting Exports of Unprocessed Herring and Salmon; GATT Panel Report United States – Prohibition of Imports of Tuna and Tuna Products from Canada.
180.
Art. 31 (c) VCLT.
181.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 263.
182.
Ibid., paras. 268–270.
183.
E.g. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora of 3 March 1973, UNTS 993, 14537.
184.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 268.
185.
Ibid., para. 276.
186.
Ibid., para. 277.
187.
Ibid., para. 278.
188.
Ibid., para. 279.
189.
Ibid., paras. 294–296.
190.
Ibid., para. 7.16.
191.
Ibid., paras. 7.18–7.23.
192.
Ibid., para. 7.26.
193.
Ibid. para. 7.28.
194.
Ibid., para. 7.34.
195.
Ibid.
196.
Ibid., para. 7.35.
197.
Ibid., para. 7.40.
198.
Ibid., para. 7.42. The first preambular paragraph states: ‘in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking both to protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the means of doing so in a manner consistent with [Members’] respective needs and concerns at different levels of economic development’.
199.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 7.44.
200.
Ibid., para. 7.45.
201.
Ibid., para. 7.49.
202.
Ibid., para. 7.50.
203.
Ibid.
204.
UNCED, The Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development, UN Doc. A/CONF.151/5/REV.1 (1992), ILM 31, 874.
205.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 7.52.
206.
Ibid., para. 7.54.
207.
Ibid., para. 7.55.
208.
Ibid., para. 7.62.
209.
Ibid., para. 7.63.
210.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 8.
211.
Ibid., para. 10.
212.
Ibid., para. 98.
213.
Ibid., para. 114.
214.
Ibid., paras. 115–116.
215.
Ibid.
216.
Ibid.
217.
Ibid., para. 117.
218.
Ibid., para. 120.
219.
Ibid., para. 122.
220.
Ibid., para. 123.
221.
E.g. Appellate Body Report European Communities – Measures Affecting the Importation of Certain Poultry Products.
222.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 128.
223.
Ibid., para. 130. The Appellate Body also made reference to the definition of natural resources under UNCLOS and the CBD: ibid.
224.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 134.
225.
Ibid., para. 133.
226.
Ibid., paras. 136–168.
227.
Ibid., para. 137.
228.
Ibid., para. 141.
229.
Ibid.
230.
Ibid., para. 142.
231.
Ibid., para. 146.
232.
Ibid., para. 147.
233.
Ibid., para. 148.
234.
Ibid., para. 149.
235.
Ibid.
236.
Ibid., para. 156.
237.
Ibid., para. 157.
238.
Ibid., para. 159.
239.
Ibid., para. 160.
240.
Ibid., para. 165.
241.
Ibid.
242.
Ibid., para. 167–168. UNCED, The Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development, UN Doc. A/CONF.151/5/REV.1 (1992), ILM 31, 874; UNCED, Report of the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development, UN Doc. A.CONF/151/26/REV.1 (Vol. I) (1992), 9 (Agenda 21), 2.22(i); Art. 5 CBD; Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of 23 June 1979, 1651 UNTS 333, Annex 1.
243.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 170–172.
244.
Ibid., paras. 174–176.
245.
Ibid., para. 177.
246.
Ibid., para. 184.
247.
Panel Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (Recourse to Article 21.5 by Malaysia), para. 1.4.
248.
Ibid., para. 2.21.
249.
Ibid.
250.
Ibid., para. 3.1.
251.
Ibid., para. 3.28.
252.
Ibid., para. 3.29.
253.
Ibid., para. 3.30.
254.
Ibid., para. 3.33.
255.
Ibid., para. 3.46.
256.
Ibid., para. 3.36.
257.
Ibid., para. 3.55.
258.
Ibid., paras. 3.67–3.75.
259.
Ibid., para. 3.99.
260.
Ibid., para. 3.104.
261.
Ibid.
262.
Ibid., para. 3.105.
263.
Ibid., paras. 5.39–5.42.
264.
Ibid., para. 5.137.
265.
Ibid., para. 5.144.
266.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (Recourse to Article 21.5 by Malaysia).
267.
Ibid., paras. 12–13.
268.
Ibid., para. 96.
269.
Ibid., paras. 99–106.
270.
Ibid., paras. 122–123.
271.
Ibid., para. 137. Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 121.
272.
Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (Recourse to Article 21.5 by Malaysia), para. 144.
273.
Ibid., para. 148 (emphasis added).
274.
Robert Howse, The Appellate Body Rulings in the Shrimp/Turtle Case: A New Legal Baseline for the Trade and Environment Debate, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 27 (2009), 489, 514.
275.
Pierre-Marie Dupuy, The Place and Role of Unilateralism in Contemporary International Law, EJIL 11 (2000), 19–29.
276.
Panel Report EC – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos -Containing Products, para. 1.2.
277.
Decree No. 96-1133 banning asbestos, issued pursuant to the Labour Code and the Consumer Code (décret no. 96-1133 relatif à l’interdiction de l’amiante, pris en application du code de travail et du code de la consommation).
278.
Ibid., Art. 1.
279.
Ibid., Art. 2.
280.
Ibid; Panel Report EC – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos -Containing Products, paras. 2.3–2.5.
281.
Panel Report EC – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos -Containing Products, para. 3.1.
282.
Ibid., para. 3.4.
283.
Ibid., para. 3.10.
284.
Institut National de la Science et de la Recherche Médicale. INSERM, Effects on Health of the Main Types of Exposure to Asbestos (1996).
285.
Panel Report EC – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 3.11.
286.
Ibid.
287.
Ibid., para. 3.12.
288.
Ibid., para. 3.13.
289.
Ibid. paras. 3.13–3.14.
290.
Ibid., para. 3.17.
291.
Ibid., para. 3.18.
292.
Ibid., para. 3.394.
293.
Ibid., para. 3.395.
294.
Ibid.
295.
For the competing arguments, see ibid., paras. 3.394–3.406.
296.
Ibid., para. 3.410.
297.
Ibid., para. 3.411. See further ibid., paras 4.12–4.25.
298.
Ibid., para. 3.411.
299.
Ibid., para. 3.426.
300.
Ibid., para. 3.427.
301.
Ibid., para. 3.429.
302.
Ibid., para. 3.431.
303.
Ibid., paras. 3.454 et seq.
304.
Ibid., paras. 3.460–3.466.
305.
Ibid., para. 3.467.
306.
Ibid., para. 3.469.
307.
Ibid., para. 3.472.
308.
Ibid., para. 3.474.
309.
Ibid., paras. 3.475–3.476; see also Appellate Body Report United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para. 157.
310.
Panel Report EC – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 3.477.
311.
Ibid., para. 3.479; ibid., 3.479–3.491.
312.
Ibid., para. 3.493.
313.
Ibid., para. 3.492; GATT Panel Report Thailand – Restrictions on Importation and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, para. 75.
314.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 3.501.
315.
Ibid., para. 3.503.
316.
Ibid., para. 8.10.
317.
Ibid., paras. 8.12–8.13.
318.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.100.
319.
Ibid., para. 8.103 (a).
320.
Ibid., para. 8.103 (b).
321.
Ibid., para. 8.111 (a).
322.
Ibid., para. 8.111 (b).
323.
Ibid., para. 8.112; Appellate Body Report Japan –Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, pg. 18.
324.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.112.
325.
Ibid., para. 8.113; Appellate Body Report United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, paras. 6.8–6.9.
326.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.114.
327.
Ibid., para. 8.125–8.126.
328.
Ibid., para. 8.129.
329.
Ibid., para. 8.130.
330.
Ibid., para. 8.136.
331.
Ibid., para. 8.140.
332.
Ibid., para. 8.143.
333.
Ibid., para. 8.144.
334.
Ibid., para. 8.149.
335.
Ibid., para. 8.150.
336.
Ibid., para. 8.155.
337.
Ibid., para. 8.158.
338.
Ibid., para. 8.159.
339.
Ibid., para. 8.169.
340.
Ibid., para. 8.170.
341.
Ibid., para. 8.171.
342.
Ibid., para. 8.193.
343.
Ibid., para. 8.194.
344.
GATT Panel Report Thailand – Restrictions on Importation and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, para. 75.
345.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.204.
346.
GATT Panel Report United States – Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, para. 5.26; Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.206.
347.
Panel Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 8.208.
348.
Ibid., para. 8.217.
349.
Ibid., para. 8.230.
350.
Ibid., para. 8.233.
351.
Ibid., para. 8.236–8.238; Appellate Body Report Japan – Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, pg. 31.
352.
Ibid., para. 8.239.
353.
Ibid., paras. 8.240–8.241. The Panel also found no nullification or impairment under Art. XXIII:1(b) GATT; ibid., para. 8.304.
354.
Appellate Body Report European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, para. 58.
355.
‘(i) the physical properties of the products; (ii) the extent to which the products are capable of serving the same or similar end-uses; (iii) the extent to which consumers perceive and treat the products as alternative means of performing particular functions in order to satisfy a particular want or demand; and (iv) the international classification of the products for tariff purposes’, ibid., para. 101.
356.
Ibid., para. 101.
357.
Ibid., para. 114.
358.
Ibid.
359.
Ibid.
360.
Ibid., para. 115.
361.
Ibid., para. 125.
362.
Ibid., paras. 126, 131.
363.
Ibid., paras. 141, 148.
364.
It should be noted that Canada also claimed that the Panel breached Art. 11 DSU in failing to make an objective assessment under Art. XX (b). Although this was an important point in the proceedings, for the sake of space it will not be addressed here. See ibid., para. 155, 176–181.
365.
Ibid., para. 162–163.
366.
Ibid., para. 175.
367.
Ibid., para. 193.
368.
Abhinay Kapoor, Product and Process Methods (PPMs): ‘a Losing Battle for Developing Countries’, International Trade Law and Regulation 17 (2011), 131 et seq.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Max Planck Foundation for International Peace and the Rule of Law, Heidelberg, Germany
Amber Rose Maggio

Authors

Amber Rose Maggio
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Maggio, A.R. (2017). Environmental Cases Under the GATT. In: Environmental Policy, Non-Product Related Process and Production Methods and the Law of the World Trade Organization. European Yearbook of International Economic Law(), vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61155-6_6

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61155-6_6
Published: 07 October 2017
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61154-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-61155-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics