Ehring, Lothar --- "Article IV of the GATT: An Obsolete Provision or Still a Basis for Cultural Policy?" [2011] ELECD 772; in Govaere, Inge; Quick, Reinhard; Bronckers, Marco (eds), "Trade and Competition Law in the EU and Beyond" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011)

Book Title: Trade and Competition Law in the EU and Beyond

Editor(s): Govaere, Inge; Quick, Reinhard; Bronckers, Marco

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9780857935663

Section: Chapter 5

Section Title: Article IV of the GATT: An Obsolete Provision or Still a Basis for Cultural Policy?

Author(s): Ehring, Lothar

Number of pages: 23

Extract:

5. Article IV of the GATT: an
obsolete provision or still a basis for
cultural policy?
Lothar Ehring*

This chapter is dedicated to Jacques Bourgeois in celebration of his 75th
birthday. Since I have known Jacques only since 2003, I would like to extend
my congratulations also on behalf of my late father, Hubert Ehring, who
knew and worked with Jacques approximately half a century ago, and who
appreciated him both professionally and personally as much as I do.


5.1 INTRODUCTION

Article IV of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 of
the World Trade Organization (WTO) has a prominent location in the text
of the GATT 1994. It follows such fundamental provisions as Article I on
most-favoured-nation treatment, Article II on scheduled tariff commit-
ments, and Article III mostly on national treatment. It precedes Article V of
the GATT 1994, another fundamental GATT article, not without reason,
given that Article IV is connected to national and most-favoured-nation
treatment.
Despite its prominent location, Article IV of the GATT 1994 is little
known; even a very versed trade lawyer may not be able to spontaneously
respond to the question of what this provision addresses. There is no GATT
or WTO jurisprudence, and there is little literature touching on the content
or interpretation of Article IV. This is probably because Article IV, contrary
to most other GATT rules located in that article's neighbourhood, is not a
fundamental obligation and does not have a broad ...