The World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Appellate Body has affirmed an
April 2015 ruling that U.S. tuna regulations discriminate against Mexico
by requiring “dolphin-safe” labels reflecting the methods used to catch
the fish that protect against capture of the mammal. In response to the
appellate ruling, the United States criticized the decision as focusing on
points that Mexico had not challenged and were merely “hypothetical”
and an “academic exercise.”

“Panels and the Appellate Body should not make their conception of the
‘perfect’ measure the enemy of all the possible good ones,” according
to the U.S. statement provided during the meeting of the WTO
Dispute Settlement Body on December 3, 2015. “In pursuing legitimate
objectives, Members should not be held to the impossible standard of
designing and applying a measure that corresponds exactly to the one
that a panel or the Appellate Body would have designed to achieve the
legitimate objective at issue. Regulators design measures to address facts,
risks, and situations actually presented, not premises and hypothetical
scenarios.”

 

Issue 586

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Close