Australia - Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon (WT/DS18/9): Award of the Arbitrator (under Art icle 21.3(c) DSU) Australia - Salmon

Summary

INTRODUCTION

On 6 November 1998, the Dispute Settlement Body (the “DSB”) adopted the Appellate Body Report and the Panel Report, as modified by the Appellate Body Report, in Australia - Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon. On 25 November 1998, Australia informed the DSB, pursuant to Article 21.3 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (the “DSU”), that it would implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute and that, in doing so, it would be “mindful” of the provisions of Article 3.5 of the DSU. Australia indicated that it would require a reasonable period of time to complete the implementation process.

By letter of 27 November 1998, Australia sought Canada's agreement to a 15-month period as the “reasonable period of time” for implementation. In a letter of 14 December 1998, Canada advised Australia that it could not agree to this proposal. Pursuant to Article 21.3 of the DSU, consultations between the parties were held on 30 November, and on 18 and 21 December 1998, but these did not produce agreement on a reasonable period of time for the implementation process.

By communication of 24 December 1998, Canada requested that the reasonable period of time be determined by binding arbitration, pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU. By joint letter of 11 January 1999, the parties informed the Director- General of the World Trade Organization (the “WTO”) that they had agreed that I should act as Arbitrator. The parties were informed, by letter of 13 January 1999, that the Director-General had conveyed their wishes to me and that I had accepted the appointment. Thereafter, by letter of 14 January 1999, the parties intimated to me that they had agreed to extend the time-period for the arbitration process, fixed at 90 days by Article 21.3(c) of the DSU, by a further 19 days, that is until 23 February 1999. Notwithstanding this extension of the time-period for the arbitration process, the parties stated that my award would be deemed to be an award made under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.

Written submissions were received from Australia and Canada on 22 January 1999 and an oral hearing was held on 2 February 1999.