. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS326/1 
G/L/728 
G/SG/D32/1 
14 February 2005 
 
 (05-0570) 
 Original:   Spanish 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – DEFINITIVE SAFEGUARD MEASURE 
ON SALMON 
 
Request for Consultations by Chile  
 
  The following communication, dated 8 February  2005, from the delegation of Chile to the 
delegation of the European Communities and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is 
circulated in accordance with  Article 4.4 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
 
  I have been instructed by my Government to  contact you in order to request consultations 
with the European Communities pursuant to Artic le XXII:1 of the GATT 1994, Article 4 of the 
Understanding on Rules and Procedur es Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) and Article 14 
of the Agreement on Safeguards.  This request is related to the definitive safeguard measure applied 
by the European Communities to imports of farmed salmon, whether or not filleted, fresh, chilled or 
frozen (CN ex 0302 12 00, ex 0303 11 00, ex 0303 19 00, ex 0303 222 00, ex 0304 10 13 and ex 0304 20 13). 
 
 On 5 February 2005, Commission Regulation (EC) No. 206/2005 of 4 February 2005 imposing a definitive safeguard measure against imports of farmed salmon was published in the 
Official Journal of the European Union .  The regulation took effect on 6 February 2005 and will 
remain in force until 13 August 2008.  The measur e consists of (a) a system of tariff quotas 
established on the basis of traditional volumes of ex ports to the EU, beyond which an additional duty, 
specified in the regulation, will be applied to the pr oducts in question;  (b) a minimum import price, 
which applies to imports both within and beyond the tariff quota;  and (c) a deposit payable by 
importers as a security for payment of the actual import price.   On 10 January 2005, the European Communities notified to the WTO a finding of serious 
injury and a decision to apply a definitive saf eguard measure (G/SG/N/8/EEC/3, G/SG/N/10/EEC/3 
and G/SG/N/11/EEC/3/Suppl.1).  Pursuant to Ar ticle 12.3 of the Agreement on Safeguards, Chile 
requested consultations, which were held in Brussels on 20 January last. 
  Chile considers this definitive safeguard measu re to be inconsistent with the WTO rules for 
the reasons set out below, among others.  The meas ure is having serious adverse effects on Chile's 
exports of the product in question to the European market.  
• The product to which the measure applies and the like and directly competitive 
products were not correctly defined, fro zen farmed salmon being a different product 
from the fresh salmon produced by the EC industry. 
 WT/DS326/1 
G/L/728 G/SG/D32/1 
Page 2 
  
 • There were no "unforeseen developments" as a result of which imports increased, as 
required by Article XIX of the GATT 1994.   
 
• There was no increase in imports that w as sufficiently recent, sudden, sharp and 
significant, as required by Article XIX of the GATT 1994 and Article 2.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards, and that occu rred under such conditions as to cause or 
threaten to cause serious injury to the domest ic industry.  Nor was there an increase in 
imports relative to  domestic production. 
 
• There is no serious injury or threat of injury to the domestic industry and the 
determination of injury carried out by the investigation authority was based on 
allegations by the domestic industry and on  conjecture and remote possibility.  The 
investigating authority did not evaluate or c onsider all relevant factors of an objective 
and quantifiable nature having a bearing on the situation of the domestic industry.  In 
fact, the factors evaluated do not show injury  to the industry.  Furthermore, it is not 
clear that the injury analysis covered the whole industry, since the authority 
acknowledges that some factors were analy sed with respect only to the cooperating 
companies.  What is more, the indicators th at did cover the whole industry show that 
the industry has not suffered injury.  Under "other factors", in which the cooperating 
companies were included, the financial data  relate to the companies' production as a 
whole and not to salmon production specifically.  Indeed, the Commission's report 
recommending the measure notes that this information is "less meaningful".  The 
foregoing is inconsistent with Article 4.2(a) of the Agreement on Safeguards. 
 
• In the absence of injury or th reat of injury attributable to the increase in imports, the 
safeguard measure is inconsistent with  Article 4.2(b) of the Agreement on 
Safeguards.  And in any event, any injury or threat of injury is due to other factors, 
which the investigation authority did not analyse (such as the absence of economies 
of scale among the Scottish and Irish producer s and exchange rate fluctuations).  
Instead, it attributed the injury  to the increase in imports. 
 
• Lastly, the safeguard measure on imports of salmon is applied beyond the extent 
necessary to prevent or remedy serious inju ry and to facilitate adjustment, in breach 
of Article 5 of the Agreement on Safeguards. 
 
In the light of the above considerations, Ch ile considers the definitive safeguard measure 
imposed on imports of farmed salmon, whether or not filleted, fresh, chilled or frozen to be inconsistent with various WTO provisions, includ ing Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the Agreement on 
Safeguards and Article XIX:1 of the GATT 1994. 
 
I await your reply to this request for consulta tions in order to establish a mutually convenient 
date for holding them. 
 
__________