Whether the Panel erred in applying the rules of treaty interpretation codified in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and in interpreting the term ‘salted’ under heading 0210 of the European Communities’ Schedule LXXX (the tariff schedule at issue) when it found that frozen boneless chicken cuts impregnated with salt (the specific products at issue) fell within this category.
Whether the Panel erred in applying the rules of treaty interpretation by taking into account what the Panel referred to as the ‘factual context for the consideration of the ordinary meaning’ of the term ‘salted’ under the tariff schedule at issue.
Whether the Panel erred in applying the rules of treaty interpretation by finding that an interpretation of the term ‘salted’ in the EC Schedule included the criterion of preservation, as that could undermine the security and predictability in market access arrangements in the light of ‘object and purpose’ of the World Trade Organization Agreements.
Whether the Panel erred in applying the rules of treaty interpretation by finding that the EC’s practice of classifying the products at issue amounted to ‘subsequent practice’.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full
content. Please,
subscribe
or
login
to access all content.