338 “This means that a working group set up to review a notification under Article XXIV, paragraph 7, point a), is responsible for examining the frequency and limitation of all trade rights and rules, particularly those subject to the provisions of the agreements contained in Schedule 1A of the WTO agreement. It should be noted, however, that, in light of Article XXIV, paragraph 5, point a), the review would not be to determine whether each individual tariff or regulation that exists or is introduced in the formation of a customs union is not compatible with all the provisions of the WTO agreement; Consideration should be given to whether the overall impact of tariffs and other trade regulations has increased overall or has become more restrictive.Â read by the President of the Trade in Goods Council – 20 February 1995, WT/REG3/1 (emphasis). This status quo is found in paragraph 5, Article XXIV of the GATT. But here, all the dependence on Article XXIV is falling apart. The “status quo” does not apply to UK-EU relations. Put the microphone down. It applies to trade with third countries in order to protect them from protectionism and the circumvention of the MFN principle by the parties to a free trade agreement. It will not serve to give the UK a “status quo” on its trade with the EU. Boris Johnson was hired by the BBC`s Andrew Neil for his knowledge of GA TT 24 – the WTO rules clause that he said could allow the UK to continue to trade freely with the EU in a non-deal scenario. The UK (with EU agreement) could try a similar tactic – that is, conclude a comprehensive free trade agreement – and circumvent the high level of control.
This could harm both the UK and the EU. Such a free trade agreement will take some time, especially if the UK has said it wants to have rules different from those in the EU. Therefore, if the UK and the EU reached an agreement that would be considered an interim agreement under Article XXIV of the GATT, it would follow the usual practice that the UK and the EU would declare it to the WTO as a comprehensive free trade agreement and not as an interim agreement. Such an agreement would be in effect until a future relationship is concluded. Moreover, if the UK were to briefly degenerate trade with the EU, WTO members could argue that a new agreement would harm the nature of their trade with both sides and completely close the door to an interim agreement between Britain and Brussels. Considering that their trade relations and the economic efforts they must make to improve living standards should be maintained, guaranteeing full employment and a significant and ever-increasing volume of real income, the development of the full use of global resources and the expansion of the production and exchange of goods, this duration has been agreed by WTO members to mean less than 10 years – meaning that Mr Johnson will have to negotiate a clear idea of the final relationship between the UK and the EU over the next ten years before it slips into a non-agreement scenario if GATT 24 continues to help the UK.