The General Agreement On Trade And Tariffs (Gatt)

The Uruguay Round, held from 1986 to 1993 and culminating in the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), also broadened the topics for discussion, including intellectual property. At the end of the Uruguay round, members signed the agreement on aspects of intellectual property rights that affect trade, commonly known as “TRIPS”. TRIPS has forced its members to harmonize some important elements of their patent, copyright and trademark laws. In the United States, Congress had to amend patent laws (which apply only to applications that came into effect on June 5, 1995), the most important of which were: (a) the calculation of patent duration; and b) the publication of pending patent applications. The WTO was created in 1995 to succeed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) created after the Second World War. THE WTO agreements, which are important for food protection measures, are measures relating to health and plant health measures (SPS) 2 and technical barriers to trade (OTC). The SPS and OBT agreements are complementary, both constituting the general legal basis for other legally binding international agreements and instruments that will be adopted on a voluntary basis, such as the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Karnicki, 1996). The SPS agreement includes: relevant laws, regulations and regulations; testing, inspection, certification and authorisation procedures; packaging and labelling requirements directly related to food safety. On the other hand, the TBT agreement includes all technical rules relating to traditional quality factors, fraudulent practices, packaging and markings. (d) This paragraph should not be construed as requiring a contracting party to change the method of currency conversion in force on its territory on the date of this agreement for customs purposes if this amendment would result in a general increase in the amounts owed in respect of customs duties. In addition, countries could restrict trade for national security reasons. These include patent protection, copyright and public morality.

The assertion that Article 24 could be used in this way has been criticized as unrealistic by Mark Carney, Liam Fox and others, as point 5c of the contract requires an agreement between the parties so that Article 5b can be useful, since there would be no agreement in the case of a non-agreement scenario.