|
Article I. See Enabling Clause, Paragraph 1
(E.1.1); MFN
Treatment, Article I of the GATT 1994 (M.2.1)
Article II. See Tariff Concessions
(T.1)
Article III. See National Treatment
(N.1); SCM Agreement,
Article III:8 of the GATT 1994 — Subsidies (S.2.42)
Article VI. See Anti-Dumping Agreement
(A.3)
Article VI:3. See SCM Agreement, Article VI:3 of the GATT
1994 — Subsidies (S.2.43)
Article VIII. See International Monetary Fund
— “Coherence”
(I.2)
Article X. See Licensing Agreement
(L.2); Publication and
Administration of Trade Regulations (P.5)
Article XIII. See Tariff Quotas
— Non-Discriminatory
Administration (T.2)
Article XV. See International Monetary Fund
— “Coherence”
(I.2); Seek Information and Technical Advice
(S.4)
Article XVI. See SCM Agreement, Relationship between the
SCM Agreement and the GATT 1994 (S.2.41)
Article XVIII:11, Ad Note. See Balance-of-Payments
Restrictions (B.1)
Article XVIII:11, Proviso. See Balance-of-Payments
Restrictions (B.1)
Article XIX. See Safeguards Agreement, Article XIX of the
GATT 1994 (S.1.45-50); Safeguards Agreement, Relationship between the
Safeguards Agreement and the GATT 1994 (S.1.44)
Article XX. See General Exceptions: Article XX of the GATT
1994 (G.3)
Article XXIV. See Regional Agreements
(R.1)
G.2.1 Language of Annex 1A incorporating the GATT 1994 into the WTO
Agreement. See also Status of Panel and Appellate Body
Reports (S.8) back to top
G.2.1.1 Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, p. 14, DSR 1996:I, p.
97 at 107-108
(WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R)
Article XVI:1 of the WTO Agreement and paragraph 1(b)(iv) of
the language of Annex 1A incorporating the GATT 1994 into the WTO
Agreement bring the legal history and experience under the GATT 1947
into the new realm of the WTO in a way that ensures continuity and
consistency in a smooth transition from the GATT 1947 system. This
affirms the importance to the Members of the WTO of the experience
acquired by the CONTRACTING PARTIES to the GATT 1947 — and
acknowledges the continuing relevance of that experience to the new
trading system served by the WTO. …
G.2.1.2 Argentina — Footwear (EC), para. 80
(WT/DS121/AB/R)
We note that the GATT 1994 is the first agreement that appears in
Annex 1A to the WTO Agreement, and that it consists of: the
provisions of the GATT 1947, as rectified, amended or modified by the
terms of legal instruments that entered into force before the entry into
force of the WTO Agreement; the provisions of certain legal
instruments, such as protocols and certifications, decisions on waivers
and other decisions of the CONTRACTING PARTIES to the GATT 1947, that
entered into force under the GATT 1947 before the entry into force of
the WTO Agreement; certain Uruguay Round Understandings relating
to specific GATT articles; and the Marrakesh Protocol to the GATT 1994
containing Members’ Schedules of Concessions.
G.2.1.3 Korea — Dairy, para. 75
(WT/DS98/AB/R)
We note, furthermore, that the GATT 1994 was incorporated into the WTO
Agreement as one of the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods
contained in Annex 1A to the WTO Agreement. The GATT 1994
consists of: (a) the provisions of the GATT 1947, as rectified, amended
or modified before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement; (b)
provisions of certain other legal instruments which entered into force
under the GATT 1947 and before the date of entry into force of the WTO
Agreement; (c) a number of Uruguay Round Understandings on the
interpretation of certain GATT articles; and (d) the Marrakesh Protocol
to GATT 1994. The Agreement on Safeguards is one of the thirteen
Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods contained in Annex 1A of the WTO
Agreement. It is important to understand that the WTO Agreement is
one treaty. The GATT 1994 and the Agreement on
Safeguards are both Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods
contained in Annex 1A, which are integral parts of that treaty and are
equally binding on all Members pursuant to Article II:2 of the WTO
Agreement.
G.2.1.4 US — FSC, para. 107
(WT/DS108/AB/R)
… Paragraph 1(b) stipulates that the GATT 1994 includes certain “legal
instruments … that entered into force under the GATT 1947”, such as
“other decisions of the CONTRACTING PARTIES to the GATT 1947” under
sub-paragraph (b)(iv). As the Panel said, in terms of Article II:2 of
the WTO Agreement, these various “legal instruments” are, in
themselves, “integral parts” of the WTO Agreement and are “binding
on all Members”. The inclusion of these “legal instruments” in the
GATT 1994 recognizes that the legal character of the rights and
obligations of the contracting parties under the GATT 1994 is not fully
reflected by the text of the GATT 1994 because those rights and
obligations are conditioned by the “protocols”, “decisions” and
other “legal instruments” to which paragraph 1(b) refers.
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Agriculture.
See Agreement on Agriculture, Relationship between the
Agreement on Agriculture and the GATT 1994 (A.1.37)
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement. See
Anti-Dumping Agreement, Relationship between the Anti-Dumping
Agreement and the GATT 1994 (A.3.64)
G.2.2 Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the GATS. See
also GATS, Article I: Scope of application — Measures affecting
trade in services (G.1.1) back to top
G.2.2.1 Canada — Periodicals, p. 19, DSR 1997:I, p. 449 at 465
(WT/DS31/AB/R)
The entry into force of the GATS, as Annex 1B of the WTO Agreement,
does not diminish the scope of application of the GATT 1994. …
We agree with the Panel’s statement:
The ordinary meaning of the texts of GATT 1994 and GATS as well as
Article II:2 of the WTO Agreement, taken together, indicates that
obligations under GATT 1994 and GATS can co-exist and that one does not
override the other.
G.2.2.2 EC — Bananas III, para. 221
(WT/DS27/AB/R)
The second issue is whether the GATS and the GATT 1994 are mutually
exclusive agreements. The GATS was not intended to deal with the same
subject-matter as the GATT 1994. The GATS was intended to deal with a
subject-matter not covered by the GATT 1994, that is, with trade in
services. Thus, the GATS applies to the supply of services. It provides,
inter alia, for both MFN treatment and national treatment for
services and service suppliers. Given the respective scope of
application of the two agreements, they may or may not overlap,
depending on the nature of the measures at issue. Certain measures could
be found to fall exclusively within the scope of the GATT 1994, when
they affect trade in goods as goods. Certain measures could be found to
fall exclusively within the scope of the GATS, when they affect the
supply of services as services. There is yet a third category of
measures that could be found to fall within the scope of both the GATT
1994 and the GATS. These are measures that involve a service relating to
a particular good or a service supplied in conjunction with a particular
good. In all such cases in this third category, the measure in question
could be scrutinized under both the GATT 1994 and the GATS. However,
while the same measure could be scrutinized under both agreements, the
specific aspects of that measure examined under each agreement could be
different. Under the GATT 1994, the focus is on how the measure affects
the goods involved. Under the GATS, the focus is on how the measure
affects the supply of the service or the service suppliers involved.
Whether a certain measure affecting the supply of a service related to a
particular good is scrutinized under the GATT 1994 or the GATS, or both,
is a matter that can only be determined on a case-by-case basis. …
G.2.2.3 China — Publications and Audiovisual Products, paras.
193-194
(WT/DS363/AB/R)
We understand China to argue that, because the Film Regulation regulates
trade in services, it should be excluded from scrutiny under China’s
trading rights commitments, which are applicable only to trade in goods.
We note, in this regard, that the Appellate Body has found that a
measure could be simultaneously subject to obligations relating to trade
in goods under the GATT 1994 and to obligations relating to trade in
services under the GATS. … These findings [of the Appellate
Body in Canada — Periodicals and EC — Bananas III]
specifically concern the relationship between the GATS and the GATT
1994, and thus do not directly address the relationship between China’s
trading rights commitments and its commitments on trade in services.
Yet, these findings provide assistance in analysing the issue of whether
a measure can be simultaneously subject to obligations relating to trade
in goods and those relating to trade in services. Given that China’s
trading rights commitments apply to trade in goods, the Appellate Body
findings in these earlier disputes are also relevant to resolving the
issue of whether measures regulating services may be subject to China’s
trading rights commitments.
The Appellate Body’s approach in the above two disputes implies
that a measure can regulate both goods and services and that, as a
result, the same measure can be subject to obligations affecting trade
in goods and obligations affecting trade in services.
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Import
Licensing Procedures. See Licensing Agreement (L.2)
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards. See
Safeguards Agreement, Relationship between the Safeguards Agreement
and the GATT 1994 (S.1.44)
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the SCM Agreement. See SCM
Agreement, Relationship between the SCM Agreement and the GATT 1994 (S.2.41)
Relationship between the GATT 1994 and the Schedules to the GATT
1994. See Tariff Concessions (T.1)
|
