WTO Members on 15 January adopted a dispute panel report against practices followed by the EU when imposing anti-dumping measures on farmed salmon from Norway.

The panel found that the minimum import prices imposed by the EU on the Norwegian fish were "inconsistent with WTO rules on 22 separate grounds," concluding that the EU made errors in conducting its investigations, calculating the dumping margins, and in the assessment of injury to the EU salmon industry. However, the panel stopped short of explicitly invalidating the anti-dumping measures, or requiring the EU to repeal them.

Both parties claimed victory in the dispute. According to the Norwegian foreign affairs ministry, "the anti-dumping measures [infringed] WTO rules in such a way that [they could not] be maintained." The European Commission announced that the antidumping measures would remain in place for now.

The EU has 30 days to inform the WTO of its plans for implementing the ruling.

The EU imposed minimum import prices on farmed fish from Norway, claiming that "unfair pricing" was allowing it to be sold in the EU market at below the cost of production (see BRIDGES BioRes, 3 March 2006).

In March 2006, Norway requested WTO consultations challenging these antidumping measures.

Norway claimed that the antidumping measures were inconsistent with the EU's obligations under the Antidumping Agreement and the GATT and challenged the EU's "identification of the product under consideration, the definition of the domestic industry, the calculation of the margin of dumping, the findings of injury and causation, the remedies imposed on dumped imports, and certain procedural aspects of the investigation."

After unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issue, a panel was created to adjudicate the dispute, convening in August 2006.

Canada, China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and the US were third parties to the dispute.