Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 NOVEMBER 2005

NAFTA Panel Rejects WTO Approach to Anti-Discrimination Rules

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

The ability of NAFTA Chapter 11’s anti-discrimination rules to discipline discriminatory legislation has been called into question in the decision dismissing the challenge by Methanex of California’s ban on fuel additive MTBE. While many aspects of the decision are noteworthy, its treatment of Chapter 11’s anti-discrimination provisions is remarkable in rejecting the longstanding approach to these issues under the GATT and WTO Agreements.

CanadaInternational Law

Article by Ken Purchase, ©2005, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Originally published in Blakes Bulletin on International Trade - November 2005

The Methanex decision creates an interpretive chasm between similarly worded provisions in NAFTA and WTO agreements while arguably opening the door for protectionist legislation.

Introduction

The ability of NAFTA Chapter 11’s anti-discrimination rules to discipline discriminatory legislation has been called into question in the decision dismissing the challenge by Methanex of California’s ban on fuel additive MTBE. While many aspects of the decision are noteworthy, its treatment of Chapter 11’s anti-discrimination provisions is remarkable in rejecting the longstanding approach to these issues under the GATT and WTO Agreements.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from