JAPAN – IMPORT QUOTAS ON DRIED LA VER AND SEASONED LA VER
Document: Report of the Panel
Date: 1 February 2006
Document codes: WT/DS323/R
Complainant: South Korea
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: China, EU, New Zealand, U.S.
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. XI  GATT 1994Art. 4.2  AgricultureArt. X:3(a)  GATT 1994Art. 1.2, 1.6  Import Licensing

JAPAN – IMPORT QUOTAS ON DRIED LA VER AND
SEASONED LA VER

Report of the Panel

1. On 1 December 2004, Korea requested consultatio ns with Japan pursuant to Article 4 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), Article
XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), Article 19 of the
Agreement on Agriculture, and Article 6 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures
(Licensing Agreement) regarding Japan's impor t quotas on dried laver (1212.20-1-(1)) and seasoned
laver (2106.90-2-(2)-E-(b)). The request was circulated to Members on 3 December 2004.1
2. Consultations were held on 23 December 2004 a nd 21 January 2005, but these did not lead to
a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter.
3. On 4 February 2005, Korea requested the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) to establish a panel
pursuant to Article 6 of the DSU, Article XXIII:2 of the GATT 1994, Article 19 of the Agreement on
Agriculture, and Article 6 of the Licensing Agreement.2
4. At issue were the import quotas imposed by Jap an on dried laver (classified in Japan's
customs tariff schedule under line 1212.20-1-(1)) and seasoned laver (classified in Japan's customs
tariff schedule under line 2106.90-2-(2)-E-(b)) an d the administration of these quotas by Japan.
Korea claimed that the import quotas on dried and seasoned laver are inconsistent with Japan's
obligations under Article XI of the GATT 1994 and Ar ticle 4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture and
that the administration of these quotas is inconsistent with Article X:3(a) of the GATT 1994.3
5. On 21 March 2005, the DSB established the Panel with the following terms of reference:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered
agreements cited by Korea in document , the matter
referred to the DSB by Korea in that document, and to make such
findings as will assist the DSB in making the recommendations or in
giving the rulings provided for in those agreements."
4
6. On 18 May 2005, Korea requested the Director-G eneral to determine the composition of the
Panel, pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article 8 of the DSU. On 30 May 2005, the Director-General
composed the Panel as follows:
 Chairman: Mr Manzoor Ahmad
 Members: Mr José Alfredo Graça Lima
 M r H e l g e S e l a n d
5
7. China, the European Communities, New Zealand and the United States reserved their rights to
participate in the Panel proceedings as third parties.6
8. The Panel met with the parties on 30 and 31 August 2005. The Panel met again with the
parties on 11 and 12 October 2005.

1 "Japan – Import Quotas on Dried Laver and Seasoned Laver. Request for Consultations by Korea".
WT/DS323/1, 3 December 2004.
2 "Japan – Import Quotas on Dried Laver and Seasoned Laver. Request for the Establishment of a
Panel by Korea". WT/DS323/2, 7 February 2005.
3 Ibid.
4 "Japan – Import Quotas on Dried Laver and Seasoned Laver. Constitution of the Panel Established at
the Request of Korea". WT/DS323/3, 31 May 2005, para. 2.
5 Ibid., para. 4.
6 Ibid., para. 5.

9. China, the European Communities and New Zeal and made third-party submissions to the
Panel. These countries, as well as the United States, made oral statements during the first substantive
meeting of the Panel.
10. During the Panel proceedings, Korea requested the Panel to find that Japan's import quotas on
dried laver and seasoned laver were inconsistent with Japan's obligations under Article XI:1 of the
GATT 1994, Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agricultu re and that the administration of these quotas
was inconsistent with Article X:3(a) of th e GATT 1994 and to recommend that Japan bring its
measures into conformity with its obligations unde r these agreements. Japan responded that its Laver
Import Quotas Regime was outside the scope of the Agreement on Agriculture, that it was justified by
Article XI:2(c)(i) of the GATT 1994 and that it was fu lly consistent with Article X:3(a) of the GATT
1994.
11. The Panel issued the Descriptive Part of its report on 18 November 2005. Comments on the
Descriptive Part of the report were received from Korea and Japan (on 5 December 2005) and from
New Zealand (on 2 December 2005). China and th e United States expressed that they had no
comments.
12. On 30 November 2005, the Chairman of the Panel informed the DSB, under Article 12.9 of
the DSU, that the Panel would not be able to issue its report within six months of the agreement on the
composition and terms of reference of the Panel (Ar ticle 12.8 of the DSU). The Panel informed the
DSB that it expected to complete its work by March 2006.
7
13. According to the timetable adopted by the Pane l after consultations with the parties, the
Interim Report was scheduled to be issued by the Panel on 27 January 2006.
14. On 23 January 2006, pursuant to Article 3.6 of the DSU, the parties notified the DSB and the
relevant Councils and Committees that they had reached a mutually agr eed solution, which was
circulated as document WT/DS323/5 on 27 January 2006.
15. The Panel takes note of the mutually agreed solu tion between the parties to the dispute and of
Article 3.7 of the DSU, which provides that:
"...The aim of the dispute settlement mechan ism is to secure a positive solution to a
dispute. A solution mutually acceptable to the parties to a dispute and consistent with
the covered agreements is clearly to be preferred..."
16. The Panel likewise takes note of Article 12.7 of the DSU:
"Where the parties to the dispute have fa iled to develop a mutually satisfactory
solution, the panel shall submit its findings in the form of a written report to the DSB.
In such cases, the report of a panel shall set out the findings of fact, the applicability
of relevant provisions and the basi c rationale behind any findings and
recommendations that it makes. Where a settlement of the matter among the parties
to the dispute has been found , the report of the panel shall be confined to a brief
description of the case and to reporting that a solution has been reached." (Emphasis
added.)

7 "Japan – Import Quotas on Dried Laver and Seasoned Laver. Communication from the Chairman of
the Panel ". WT/DS323/4, 8 December 2005.

17. In view of the above, and keeping in mind its fu nctions as set out in Article 11 of the DSU,
the Panel concludes its work by reporting that a mu tually agreed solution to this dispute has been
reached between the parties.