• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >The Weakest Link: Demonstrating the Inconsistency of 'Appropriate Levels of Protection' in Australia-Salmon
【24h】

The Weakest Link: Demonstrating the Inconsistency of 'Appropriate Levels of Protection' in Australia-Salmon

机译：最弱的一环：证明澳大利亚-鲑鱼的“适当保护水平”不一致

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In Australia-Salmon, the WTO Appellate Body found Australia to be in violation of the WTO SPS Agreement based on the inconsistency of the "appropriate level of protection" underlying various SPS measures. Article 5.5 of the SPS Agreement prohibits arbitrary or unjustifiable distinctions in "appropriate levels of protection" if such distinctions result in discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade. In Australia-Salmon, Canada challenged Australia's import ban on salmon. Australia permitted the entry of other fish products that were known to host some of the same diseases cited by Australia in justifying its salmon import ban. The distinction in the "appropriate levels of protection" between Australia's regulation of salmon and its treatment of these other fish products was found to be "arbitrary or unjustified" and to have "resulted in a restriction on international trade." Australia-Salmon was the first WTO decision to find an Article 5.5 violation. Canada successfully made a "weakest link" argument to undercut Australia's regulatory justification. The decision rests on the relationship between the risk purportedly justifying the salmon import ban and the risk seemingly ignored in Australia's treatment of other fish products―the regulatory "situations" compared concerned the identical pathogens with the identical potential consequences. As such, Australia-Salmon may be an example of a category of regulatory "chains" that are peculiarly exposed to Article 5.5 challenge. In responding to the Appellate Body's ruling, Australia reduced its limits on salmon and imposed new restrictions on the other fish products. The outcome suggests that a challenge of one SPS measure under Article 5.5 may lead to the imposition of new restrictions on other imported products―an unexpected result for the free trade regime.
机译：在澳大利亚-萨尔蒙，世贸组织上诉机构基于各种SPS措施所依据的“适当保护水平”的不一致之处，认定澳大利亚违反了WTO SPS协议。 SPS协议第5.5条禁止在“适当的保护等级”中进行任意或不合理的区分，如果这种区分导致对国际贸易的歧视或变相限制。在澳大利亚鲑鱼市场，加拿大对澳大利亚的鲑鱼进口禁令提出质疑。澳大利亚允许进口其他已知与澳大利亚引述相同疾病的鱼类产品，以证明其鲑鱼进口禁令的合理性。发现澳大利亚对鲑鱼的监管与对其他鱼类产品的处理之间的“适当保护水平”之间的区别是“任意或不合理的”，并且“导致对国际贸易的限制”。澳大利亚-鲑鱼是世贸组织第一个发现违反第5.5条的决定。加拿大成功提出了“最弱的一环”论点，以削弱澳大利亚的监管理由。该决定取决于据称证明鲑鱼进口禁令合理的风险与澳大利亚对其他鱼产品的处理中似乎被忽略的风险之间的关系-管制“情况”比较的是，相同的病原体具有相同的潜在后果。因此，澳大利亚-鲑鱼可能是一类监管“链条”的一个例子，这种链条特别容易受到第5.5条规定的挑战。为了回应上诉机构的裁决，澳大利亚降低了对鲑鱼的限制，并对其他鱼类产品施加了新的限制。结果表明，根据第5.5条对一项SPS措施提出质疑可能会导致对其他进口产品施加新的限制，这对自由贸易体制而言是出乎意料的结果。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Risk analysis》 |2004年第2期|p.483-490|共8页
  • 作者

    Jeffery Atik;

  • 作者单位

    Law and Sayre Macneil Fellow, Loyola Law School, LA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 自然科学总论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号