Cosmetics and toiletries must have clear and accurate labelling in order to comply with safety laws. the ingredients label usually show ‘polyethylene’ as plastic, and many companies clearly list the term ‘microbeads’ on the front of the label. Therefore, option one is rational and supported by laws. In addition, Australia could argue the measure is a non-fiscal internal regulation under Art. III (4) which measures affecting sale, offer for sale, transport, distribution, purchase must not treat imported products less favourably than domestic like products. That is discrimination between domestic and imported products is not allowed. According to the option one, Australia imports microbeads products which the labels include the relevant information, but the information on labels may affect the microbeads sales compare to Australian non-microbeads products in …show more content…
Australia could try to fit its measure into more than one exception. All three options’ measures could apply to Art. XX (a) necessary to protect public morals, and Art. XX (b) necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health. Toxic or unsafe products would bring chaos to the whole society, and option one could be seen as to increase awareness of the microbeats threat and protect human and animal life and health, but there should be other better ways to achieve the same objective with less trade impact. Therefore, option one measure is not