COVID-19 Related Export Bans and Restrictions Under WTO Law and the Determination of Their Legal Effects on International Sale of Goods Contracts Between Parties Located in WTO Member States: Interplay Between Public and Private International Law

Yüksel Ripley, Burcu; Halatçı Ulusoy, Ülkü

doi:10.1007/978-981-16-8480-7_9

Burcu Yüksel Ripley³ &
Ülkü Halatçı Ulusoy⁴

667 Accesses
3 Altmetric

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented global health crisis. States, in an attempt to control the spread of COVID-19, have imposed drastic measures, including export bans and restrictions on medical products. The measures have affected the performance of international sale of goods contracts concerning medical products subject to the measures. The determination of the legal effects of the measures on international sale of goods contracts raises public and private international law questions. It also reveals an interplay between WTO law and private international law, which are traditionally seen as separate areas of law. The chapter analyses this interplay in the context of international sale of goods contracts concerning medical products and between parties located in WTO Member States. The chapter first considers COVID-19 related export bans and restrictions under WTO law and examines whether and to what extent they are consistent with WTO law. The chapter then focuses on the determination of the legal effects of these measures on international sale of goods contracts under private international law and examines how WTO law considerations can be relevant to this determination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic

$34.99 /Month

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Buy Now

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 129.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

The Vienna United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: Applicability, Gaps and Implementation

World Trade Organization

The Influence of Binding Private International Instruments on Domestic Laws in Times of Crisis

Notes

1.
See the WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020. Accessed 13 July 2021.
2.
See https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/trade_related_goods_measure_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
3.
See eg Yüksel Ripley (2020).
4.
See generally COVID-19 Implications for Commercial Contracts: International Sale of Goods on CIF and FOB Terms, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/INF/2021/2, 2 March 2021, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtltlbinf2021d2_en.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2021.
5.
https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/06-gatt_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
6.
See generally Franciosi (2020), Berger and Behn (2019–2020), Tsang (2020), Janssen and Wahnschaffe (2020), Kiraz and Üstün (2020).
7.
Legal literature is scarce on the interaction between WTO law and private international law, see eg Mengozzi (2001) and Dornis (2017).
8.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/export_prohibitions_report_e.pdf, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/trade_related_goods_measure_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
9.
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/igo_15apr20_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
10.
Moon (2020), p. 20.
11.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-001633_EN.html. Accessed 13 July 2021.
12.
Coke (2021).
13.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/trade_related_goods_measure_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
14.
Coke (2021).
15.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1352. Accessed 13 July 2021.
16.
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
17.
Halatçı Ulusoy (2009), p. 56. For WTO legal texts, see https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
18.
Van Den Bossche (2005), p. 44.
19.
Ibid p. 49.
20.
India—Quantitative Restrictions on Imports of Agricultural, Textile and Industrial Products - Status Report by India, WT/DS90/R, para 5.129. (India—Quantitative Restrictions).
21.
Colombia-Ports of Entry, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/1pagesum_e/ds366sum_e.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2021.
22.
China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials, WT/DS394/AB/R, para 320 (Appellate Body Report, China—Raw Materials).
23.
G/L/59/Rev.1, 3 July 2012, para 1.
24.
DG Azevedo Requests WTO Members to Share Information on Trade Measures related to Covid 19, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/dgra_24mar20_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
25.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/covid19_e/export_prohibitions_report_e.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2021.
26.
Appellate Body Report, China—Raw Materials, para 324. The Appellate Body decided that a raw material used in steel production is an essential good. For an analysis of this case, see Rolland (2021).
27.
See also the Appellate Body Decision on Korea—Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef—Agreement, WT/DS161, DS169/AB/R.
28.
Aetreya (2020).
29.
Pauwelyn (2021), pp. 7–8.
30.
Van den Bossche (2005), p. 599.
31.
https://www.meti.go.jp/english/report/data/2016WTO/pdf/02_06.pdf, p. 329. Accessed 13 July 2021.
32.
Pauwelyn (2021), p. 11.
33.
Brazil—Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres—Status Report by Brazil, para 156.
34.
Mert (2020), pp. 957–958.
35.
WT/DS135/AB/R.
36.
Ibid, para 174.
37.
Gruszczynski (2020), pp. 1–6.
38.
Fei and Liu (2021), p. 7.
39.
Article I of the GATT.
40.
Article III of the GATT.
41.
Cottier and Oesch (2005), p. 346.
42.
Halatçı Ulusoy (2021), p. 90.
43.
Russia – Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit- Report of the Panel, WT/DS512/R.
44.
Ibid, paras 7.101–7.103. On this decision, see also Dasierto (2021).
45.
Panel Report, Russia-Traffic in Transit, para 130.
46.
Lindsay (2003), p. 1312.
47.
See https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/art21_e.pdf, p. 600. Accessed 13 July 2021.
48.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/01/21/national-security-directive-united-states-global-leadership-to-strengthen-the-international-covid-19-response-and-to-advance-global-health-security-and-biological-preparedness. Accessed 13 July 2021.
49.
Fei and Liu (2021), p. 9.
50.
Plender and Wilderspin (2019), para 12–006, Chong (2006), p. 31.
51.
See generally Hartley (2020), pp. 687–688; Chong (2006), pp. 31–32.
52.
See ibid. For a definition of the category of overriding mandatory rules, see also Article 9(1) of the Rome I Regulation ((EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, pp. 6–16) which was inspired by the decision of the European Court of Justice in the joined cases C-369/96 Jean-Claude Arblade and Arblade & Fils SARL and C-376/96 Bernard Leloup, Serge Leloup and Sofrage SARL [1999] ECR-08453, 22.10.1999. See also C-184/12 United Antwerp Maritime Agencies (Unamar) NV v. Navigation.
53.
Chong (2006), p. 32.
54.
See Piovesani (2020). For a similar discussion regarding the French Ordinance 2020–306 of 25 March 2020, as amended and supplemented by Ordinance 2020–427 of 15 April 2020, see Debourg (2020).
55.
On the issue of COVID-19 measures and overriding mandatory provisions, see Nardell and Parry (2020); Franciosi (2020), pp. 434–438.
56.
On this issue, see further Sect. 3.3 below.
57.
Beaumont and McEleavy (2011), para 10.291.
58.
For different legal jurisdictions which provide for an express provision on mandatory rules of the law of the forum, see Symeonides (2014), pp. 305–306.
59.
Kunda (2007), paras 123, 146.
60.
For an example of this rare situation in the context of exchange control regulations, see J. Zeevi and Sons, Ltd. v. Grindlays Bank (Uganda) Limited 37 N.Y.2d 220, pp. 894–900, 16.06.1975. On this issue, see further Sect. 3.3 below.
61.
See eg Article 19 of the Swiss Federal Act on Private International Law (Bundesgesetz über das Internationale Privatrecht) (IPRG).
62.
See eg Article 9(3) of Rome I; Article 31 of the Turkish Private International Law (PIL) Act, numbered 5717 and dated 22 November 2007 (Turkish Official Gazette numbered 26,720 and dated 4 December 2007).
63.
See eg Article 31 of the Turkish PIL Act.
64.
See eg Article 9(3) of Rome I.
65.
For different criteria and rules that exist in different legal jurisdictions, see Symeonides (2014), pp. 305–309.
66.
Blessing (1999), p. 56; Lando and Nielsen (2008), p. 1722.
67.
On this point regarding Article 19 of the IPRG, see Hellner (2009), p. 468. See further Sect. 3.3 below.
68.
On this issue, see further Sect. 3.3 below.
69.
On this kind of substantive law questions, see eg legal literature cited in footnote n. 6.
70.
See Sects. 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 above.
71.
See eg Collins et al. (2012), para 7–002, Torremans et al. (2017), pp. 73–74.
72.
On this discussion, see Collins et al (2012), para 7–034; Torremans et al. (2017), p. 85; Beaumont and McEleavy (2011), paras 27.17–27.19. See Article 18 of Rome I which considers apportionment of the burden of proof a matter for the law applicable to the contract for contractual obligations falling within the scope of Rome I.
73.
Dornis (2017), p. 1.
74.
Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union [2012] OJ C326/13.
75.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2012] OJ C 326/47.
76.
Mańko (2017). On the effectiveness of the CJEU in interpreting EU private international law regulations, see Yüksel (2017), pp. 44–52.
77.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dsu_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
78.
See Schneider-Petsinger (2020), pp. 13–22; Statement of Director-General Elect Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to the Special Session of the WTO General Council, 13 February 2021, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news21_e/dgno_15feb21_e.pdf, p. 4. Accessed 13 July 2021.
79.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dsu_e.htm. Accessed 13 July 2021.
80.
On the interrelationship between public policy and mandatory rules, see Chong (2006), pp. 32–35.
81.
Collins et al. (2012), p. 241.
82.
See eg Article 21 of Rome I, Article 17 of the Swiss IPRG, Article 6 of the Turkish PIL Act. For provisions in different legal jurisdictions, see Symeonides (2014), p. 241.
83.
Beaumont and McEleavy (2011), para 10.305; Collins et al. (2012), para 32–185.
84.
On this point in Turkish private international law, see eg Yüksel (2014), p. 20.
85.
Beaumont and McEleavy (2011), paras 10.315–10.316; Kunda (2007), para 225.
86.
See Yüksel (2014), p. 178.
87.
See Sect. 3.2 above.

References

Aetreya SS (2020) Are Covid-19 related trade restrictions WTO-consistent? https://www.ejiltalk.org/are-covid-19-related-trade-restrictions-wto-consistent/
Beaumont P, McEleavy PE (2011) Anton’s private international law. 3rd edn. Wood Green, Edinburgh
Google Scholar
Berger KP, Behn D (2019–2020) Force majeure and hardship in the age of corona: a historical and comparative study. McGill J Dispute Resolut 6:76
Google Scholar
Blessing M (1999) Impact of the extraterritorial application of mandatory rules of law on international contracts. Helbing and Lichtenhahn, Basel. https://media.baerkarrer.ch/karmarun/image/upload/baer-karrer/4_3_9.pdf
Chong A (2006) The public policy and mandatory rules of third countries in international contracts. J Priv Int Law 17:27
Google Scholar
Coke P (2021) Export restrictions: fighting COVID-19 with hands tied. https://unctad.org/news/export-restrictions-fighting-covid-19-hands-tied
Collins L et al (2012) Dicey, Morris and Collins on the conflict of laws, 15th edn. Sweet & Maxwell, London
Google Scholar
Cottier T, Oesch M (2005) International trade regulation: law and policy in the WTO, the European union and Switzerland. Staempfli Publishers Lmr, Berne
Google Scholar
Dasierto D (2021) The reviewability of the security exception in GATT article XXI in Russia—traffic in transit: implications for South China sea investment disputes in GATT article XXI-type clauses in ASEAN regional investment treaties. https://www.ejiltalk.org/wto-panel-in-russia-traffic-in-transit-declares-gatt-article-xxi-is-reviewable/
Debourg C (2020) Covid-19: mandatory laws and ordinances in 2020. https://www.gide.com/en/news/covid-19-mandatory-laws-and-ordinances-in-2020
Dornis TW (2017) WTO and private international law. In: Jürgen Basedow et al (eds) Encyclopaedia of private international law. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2992815
Fei X, Liu J (2021) Trade regulations for export restrictions on medical supplies during the pandemic: shortcomings and suggestions. https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/80%20Final-Team%20Xiuyan%20Fei-China.pdf
Franciosi LM (2020) The effects of COVID-19 on international contracts: a comparative review. VUWLR 51:413
Google Scholar
Gruszczynski L (2020) The COVID-19 pandemic and international trade: temporary turbulence or paradigm shift? Eur J Risk Regul 11:2
Google Scholar
Halatçı Ulusoy Ü (2021) Covid-19 Salgını Sonrası Medı̇kal Ürünlere Uygulanan İhracat Kısıtlamalarının Dünya Tı̇caret Örgütü Kuralları Kapsamında Değerlendı̇rı̇lmesı̇. Banka Ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi XXXVI I(2):73–99
Google Scholar
Halatçı Ulusoy Ü (2009) Dünya Ticaret Örgütünde Uyuşmazlıkların Çözümü Mekanizması. Yetkin, Ankara
Google Scholar
Hartley TC (2020) International commercial litigation: text, cases and materials on private international law, 3rd edn. CUP, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Hellner M (2009) Third country overriding mandatory rules in the Rome I regulation: old wine in new bottles? J Priv Int Law 5(3):447–470
Google Scholar
Janssen A, Wahnschaffe CJ (2020) COVID-19 and international sale contracts: unprecedented grounds for exemption or business as usual? Uniform Law Rev 25(4):466–495
Google Scholar
Kiraz ŞE, Yıldız Üstün E (2020) COVID-19 and force majeure clauses: an examination of arbitral tribunal’s awards. Uniform Law Rev 25(4):437–465
Google Scholar
Kunda I (2007) Internationally mandatory rules of a third country in the European contract conflict of laws: the rome convention and the proposed Rome I regulation. Rijeka Law Faculty, Rijeka
Google Scholar
Lando O, Nielsen PA (2008) The rome I regulation. Common Mark Law Rev 45:1687–1725
Google Scholar
Lindsay P (2003) The ambiguity of GATT article XXI: subtle success or rampant failure? Duke Law J 52:1277–1313
Google Scholar
Mańko R (2017) Preliminary reference procedure, European Parliament Briefing. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/608628/EPRS_BRI(2017)608628_EN.pdf
Mengozzi P (2001) Private international law and the WTO law. Collect Courses Hague Acad Int Law 292:249–385
Google Scholar
Mert BM (2020) Covid-19 Salgını Sebebiyle Milletlerarası Yatırım Tahkimine Konu Olabilecek İddia ve Savunmalar. Public Priv Int Law Bull 40(2):937–963
Google Scholar
Moon BE (2000) Dilemmas of international trade. Westlaw Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Nardell G, Parry A (2020) Placing choice of law under lockdown: COVID-19 measures and overriding mandatory provisions. Twenty Essex Bulletin. https://twentyessex.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Placing-choice-of-law-under-lockdown.pdf
Pauwelyn J (2021) Export restrictions in times of pandemic: options and limits under international trade agreements. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3579965
Piovesani E (2020) Italian self-proclaimed overriding mandatory provisions to fight coronavirus. Conflict of Laws.net. https://conflictoflaws.net/2020/italian-self-proclaimed-overriding-mandatory-provisions-to-fight-coronavirus/
Plender R, Wilderspin M (2019) The European private international law of obligations, 5th edn. Sweet and Maxwell, London
Google Scholar
Rolland SE (2021) China-raw materials: WTO rules on Chinese Natural resources export dispute. Vol:16/21. https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/16/issue/21/china-raw-materials-wto-rules-chinese-natural-resources-export-dispute
Schneider-Petsinger M (2020) Reforming the world trade organization: prospects for transatlantic cooperation and the global trade system. Chatham House. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2020-09-11-reforming-wto-schneider-petsinger.pdf.pdf
Symeonides SC (2014) Codifying choice of law around the world: an international comparative analysis. OUP, Oxford
Google Scholar
Torremans P et al (eds) (2017) Cheshire, North and Fawcett: private international law, 15th edn. OUP, Oxford
Google Scholar
Tsang KF (2020) From coronation to coronavirus: COVID-19, force majeure and private international law. Fordham Law J 44:187
Google Scholar
Van Den Bossche P (2005) The law and the policy of the world trade organisation: text, cases and materials. CUP, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Yüksel B (2014) Choice of law in civil and commercial matters under Turkish private international law in comparison with their equivalents under the Rome I and Rome II regulations. In: Beaumont P, Yüksel B (eds), Turkish and EU private international law: a comparison. XII Levha, Ankara, pp 153–223
Google Scholar
Yüksel B (2017) An analysis of the effectiveness of the EU institutions in making and interpreting EU private international law regulations. In: Beaumont P, Danov M, Trimmings K, Yüksel B (eds) Cross-border litigation in Europe. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 35–53
Google Scholar
Yüksel Ripley B (2020) Transition to paperless trade to mitigate COVID-19 impact on international trade. Aberdeen Law School Blog. https://www.abdn.ac.uk/law/blog/transition-to-paperless-trade-to-mitigate-covid19-impact-on-international-trade/

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Jamie Murphy for his research assistance in the preparation of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Centre for Commercial Law, University of Aberdeen School of Law, Aberdeen, Scotland
Burcu Yüksel Ripley
Department of Public International Law, University of Ankara Faculty of Law, Ankara, Turkey
Ülkü Halatçı Ulusoy

Authors

Burcu Yüksel Ripley
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Ülkü Halatçı Ulusoy
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Burcu Yüksel Ripley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Maritime Law, Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS, Australia
Poomintr Sooksripaisarnkit
Jindal Global Law School, O. P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India
Dharmita Prasad

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yüksel Ripley, B., Halatçı Ulusoy, Ü. (2022). COVID-19 Related Export Bans and Restrictions Under WTO Law and the Determination of Their Legal Effects on International Sale of Goods Contracts Between Parties Located in WTO Member States: Interplay Between Public and Private International Law. In: Sooksripaisarnkit, P., Prasad, D. (eds) Blurry Boundaries of Public and Private International Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8480-7_9

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8480-7_9
Published: 23 February 2022
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-8479-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-8480-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics