WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/W/334 
15 March 2011  
 
(11-1289) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:   English/ 
 Spanish 
 
 
 
BRAZIL'S LABELLING REQUIREM ENTS FOR CANNED SARDINES 
 
The following communication, dated 14 March 2011, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Peru.  
 
 
_______________ 
 
 I. INTRODUCTION 
1. For many years Peru has tried to export  and market canned fish of the species Engraulis 
ringens under the name "Sardines X" in Brazil. However,  the competent Brazilian authorities have not 
allowed Peru to make use of this name, even though there is an international standard that allows it, 
the Codex Standard for canned sardines and sardines-type products  (Codex Stan 94
1). On many 
occasions, Peru has expressed its concern for the tr ade restrictions imposed by Brazil, without 
obtaining a satisfactory response from the Brazilia n authorities in various bilateral meetings.  
II. CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOS ED TECHNICAL REGULATION 
2. The situation faced by exporters of Peruvian sar dines in their attempts to enter the Brazilian 
market would be further affected by a proposed t echnical regulations (PTR) for the identification and 
quality of canned sardine contained in Ministerial Provision No. 406 of 10 August 2010, and notified 
to the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade through document G/TBT/N/BRA/386.  
3. The proposed regulation would confirm the ex clusion of products manufactured from the 
species Engraulis ringens and to use the trade name "Sar dines X" in the Brazilian market .  In that 
regard, Peru is greatly concerned about articles 3 and 5 of the PTR.  
III. CONCERNS ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PTR WITH THE TBT 
AGREEMENT 
4. According to Article 2.2 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade  (The TBT 
Agreement) , Members shall ensure that they do not develop, adopt or implement technical regulations 
which create unnecessary obstacles to international trade and, to this end, these regulations will not 
restrict trade more than necessary to achieve a leg itimate objective, taking into account the risks that 
they would create if the latter are not met.  
5. For its part, Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement establishes that when these technical 
regulations are necessary and relevant international standards exist or their completion is imminent, 
Members shall use them, or the relevant parts of th em, as a basis for their technical regulations except 
                                                      
1 Codex Stan 94 has been recognized as the interna tional relevant legislation for sardines and sardine-
like canned products, including labeling requirements (Appellate Body report, European Communities-Trade 
Description of Sardines). G/TBT/W/334 
Page 2  
 
  when such international standards or the relevant parts would be ineffective or inappropriate means 
for the achievement of the legitimate objectives pursued. 
6. In light of these provisions and Codex Stan 94 as a relevant international standard, the 
concern of the Peru is as follows: 
A. A
RTICLE 3 OF THE PTR  EXCLUDES SPECIES LISTED IN CODEX STAN 94 FROM WHICH CANNED 
SARDINES AND SARDINE -TYPE PRODUCTS CAN BE PREPARED . 
7. Codex Stan 94 lists 22 species from which canne d sardines and sardine-type products can be 
prepared. No exclusion for the species re ferred to in this list is anticipated. 
8. For its part, Article 3.1 of the PTR points out that the raw material for canned sardines must 
come from one of the following nine species in the Clupeidae  family: (a) Sardinella janeiro 
(Sardinella brasiliensis ); (b) Sardinella aurita ; (c) Sardina pilchardus ; (d) Sardinops sagax  and 
related species ( Sardinops melanostictus, Sardinops neoplichardus  and Sardinops caeruleus ) (e) 
Ophisthonema oglinum ; and (f) Ophistonema libertate . Thus, article 3.1 of the PTR excludes 14 of the 
22 species listed in Codex Stan 94.  Among the sp ecies whose reference is omitted is the species 
Engraulis ringens .  
9. As a result, Peru considers that article 3.1 of the PTR is a departure from the relevant 
international standard. 
B.  ARTICLE 5 OF THE PTR EXCLUDES SPECIES LISTED IN CODEX STAN 94 OF THE POSSIBILITY OF 
USING THE NAME "SARDINES X".  
10. Codex Stan 94 provides that the name "Sardines X" can be used for canned sardines of 21 of 
the 22 species listed in this international standard. Among these species is the species Engraulis 
ringens . No exclusion clause is expected for the use of the name "Sardines X" with regard to the listed 
species.  
11. For its part, article 5 of the PTR provides that  the marketing label for processed products of 
the species selected under article 3 of the PTR must comply with the following denominations: I) sardine (reserved excluvely for the species Sardinella janeiro , Sardinella aurita  and Sardina 
pilchardus ); II) Pacific sardine (reserved for the species Sardinops sagax  and related species), and III) 
Sardine laje (reserved exclusively for the species Ophisthonema oglinum  and Ophistonema libertate ). 
Thus, article 5 of the PTR excludes products of the species Engraulis ringens  of the possibility of 
using the name "Sardines X".  
12. Consequently, Peru finds that article 5 of  the PTR is a departure from the relevant 
international standard.  
C. B
RAZIL HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE OBJECTIVE UNDERLYING ARTICLES 3 AND 5 OF THE PTR 
AND WHY IT CONSIDERS THAT CODEX STAN 94 IS NOT EFFECTIVE OR INAPPROPRIATE TO 
REACH SUCH OBJECTIVE  
13. Despite the fact that these provisions depart fro m relevant international standards, Brazil has 
not explained adequately the objective that it aims to  achieve with the exclusion of certain species of 
the use of the name "Sardines X".  In paragraph 8.4 of notification G/TBT/N/BRA/386 to the 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, Brazil did not indicate the relevant international standard 
being used.  However, in notification G/ SPS/N/BRA/666 to the Committee on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures of the WTO, Brazil pointed out that there is a relevant international standard 
of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.  In this sense, Brazil has not indicated whether the PTR 
complies with this rule or if there is any reason why it should deviate from the same.  G/TBT/W/334 
 Page 3 
 
 
  14.  Moreover, Peru notes that standards on canned sardines or sardine-type products from other 
Members literally use the provisions envisaged in Co dex Stan 94. Thus, count ries with heterogeneous 
sectors of consumption, as the European Union, Canada, Colombia, or Uruguay allow the species 
Engraulis ringens  to be used as raw material for canning us ing the name "Sardines X" or "sardine-
type products", if applicable. This observation confirms that Codex Stan 94 is widely used 
internationally and considered as an international standard that provides adequate, appropriate and 
effective provisions for the designation of canned fish of the species Engraulis ringens  as "Sardines 
X".  
15. Consequently, Peru does not find any reason why Brazil seeks to deviate from the provisions 
of Codex Stan 94 and why Brazil would deem that th is international standard is inappropriate or 
ineffective to achieve the objectiv e pursued with the exclusion of "Sardines X" labeling to products of 
the species Engraulis ringens , among other species.  
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND REQUEST TO BRAZIL 
16. As a result, Peru is concerned with the rest rictive commercial effect of the PTR and its 
compatibility, in particular Articles 3.1 and 5, with  the provisions of Codex Stan 94 and Articles 2.2 
and 2.4 of the TBT Agreement.  
17. Thus, Peru requests Brazil to bring the PTR in to compliance with the relevant international 
standard, Codex Stan 94, and to accept the denomination and the labeling of the species Engraulis 
ringens  as "Sardines X". 
18. In addition, pursuant to Article 2.5 of the TB T Agreement, Peru asks Brazil to clarify and 
justify the following questions in light of pa ragraphs 2.2 and 2.4 of the TBT Agreement:  
(a) What is the legitimate objective of Brazil to prevent that the species Engraulis 
ringens  be considered as raw material for sardine canning and that products made 
from this species use the name "Sardines X"? 
(b) What is the reason why the implementation of Codex Stan 94, with regard to the use 
of the name "Sardines X" for canned fish of the species Engraulis ringens, would be 
ineffective or inappropriate for achieving the objectives of Brazil?  
(c) What technical regulations or other measures are currently preventing the use of the 
name "Sardines X" to products made from the species Engraulis ringens? 
(d) When does Brazil expect the PTR to come into force?  
(e) Under what criterion the PTR includes the species Opisthonema libertate  in the name 
Sardine laje , if it is not in the list of species that  can be referred to as canned sardines 
or similar products of paragraph 2.1 of the standard Codex Stan 94-1981? 
(f) How does Brazil justify these measures in light of Articles 2.2 and 2.4 of the TBT 
Agreement? 
 
__________