RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/DS14/1
G/L/18
G/TBT/D/2
31July1995
ORGANIZATION(95-2203)
Original: Spanish
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES -TRADE DESCRIPTION OFSCALLOPS
Request forConsultations byChile
Thefollowing communication, dated 24July1995, from thePermanent Mission ofChile to
thePermanent Delegation oftheEuropean Commission iscirculated inaccordance withArticle 4:4
oftheDSU.
_______________
Inthename oftheGovernment ofChile, Ihavethehonour torequest consultations withthe
European Union concerning theFrench Government Order NOR MERP9300051 Aof22March 1993
andsubsequent amendments laying down theofficial names andthetrade description ofpectinidae
(scallops). Thisrequest ismade pursuant toArticle XXII:1 oftheGeneral Agreement onTariffs and
Trade 1994, Article 14.1oftheAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade, andArticle 4ofthe
Understanding onRules andProcedures Governing theSettlement ofDisputes oftheWorld Trade
Organization.
TheaimoftheFrench Order anditssubsequent amendments istorestrict thetradedescription
which canbeusedinFrance formarketing Chilean scallops, whose scientific name isAgropecten
purpuratus. Themost recent amendment permits theuseofthetrade description "pétoncle
(Saint-Jacques)" upto31December 1995, butfromthatdateonwards onlythedescription "pétoncle"
willbeallowed. Therequirement thatthedescription ofChilean scallops must include theword
"pétoncle" entails economic injury since ontheFrench market theword "pétoncle" isassociated with
aproduct oflower quality andprice.
Chile considers thatthismeasure isunjustified, bothbecause itiscontrary totraditional trade
practice which hasallowed thefrozen Chilean product tobesoldas"noix deCoquille St.Jacques"
or"noix deSt.Jacques" andbecause theconsumer isunable todistinguish between Agropecten
purpuratus andamollusc ofthePecten species, there being nodifference between thetwoproducts
withrespect totheirphysical (size, colour andappearance) ororganoleptic (taste, smell, texture, etc.)
characteristics oruse.
Accordingly, itisconsidered thattheFrench measures areinconsistent withtheprovisions
oftheAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade (Articles 2.1and2.2)andwithArticles IandIII
oftheGATT 1994, nullifying andimpairing thebenefits accruing toChile under theWTO.
./.WT/DS14/1
G/L/18
G/TBT/D/2
Page2
Chile hasmade numerous representations toboththeFrench andtheCommunity authorities
inanunsuccessful effort tosettle theissue atthelevel oftheFrench Government ortheEuropean
Commission.
Moreover, given itssubstantial stakeintheexport ofscallops toFrance, Chile associated itself
withtheconsultations requested byCanada under Article XXII, which were heldon19June1995.
TheGovernment ofChile hopes thatthese consultations willleadtoamutually satisfactory
solution andrequests thattheybeheldassoonaspossible.