John Jackson and WTO Dispute Settlement

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-406
Author(s):  
WILLIAM J. DAVEY

John Jackson bestrode the world of international trade law like a Colossus. His 1969 treatise on World Trade and the Law of GATT was called the bible of GATT law. His 1977 casebook on Legal Problems of International Economic Relations created a new law school course and introduced thousands of students around the globe to international trade law. It was the leading international trade law casebook for decades, and his students went on to positions of responsibility throughout the world in governments, international organizations, and private practice. His analysis of GATT infirmities convinced certain influential governments to push for a new international trade organization, which eventually saw life as the World Trade Organization. It was a great honor for me to have been associated with John for over thirty years. Indeed, his 1985 invitation to join as a co-author of the casebook after my first year in law teaching undoubtedly saved me many years of drudgery as a corporate/securities law scholar. Thus, I am pleased to offer some thoughts on John's influence on dispute settlement under GATT and the WTO.

1996 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 337-360
Author(s):  
David Palmeter

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) began more as a diplomatic forum where parties compromised disagreements than a court that settled them. The term ‘conciliation’ was used more frequently to describe the process than the term ‘dispute settlement’. However, over nearly half a century as the focal point of international trade law and diplomacy, GATT's dispute settlement procedures moved decidedly, if not steadily, from the diplomatic to the juridical. With the adoption of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO), the juridical model clearly has prevailed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Sykes

AbstractMany animal and environmental activists think of international trade law as a block to the achievement of their goals and perceive the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a threat to animals. Yet, the first legal decision of an international tribunal to devote careful, sustained attention to animal welfare issues comes from the WTO, in the EC – Seal Products decision. This article argues that international trade law is currently an important, although under-acknowledged, locus for the development of global norms concerning the protection of animals, and that animal conservation and animal welfare can be seen as aspects of a single overarching principle of animal protection. International trade law contributes to animal protection in two ways. Firstly, WTO jurisprudence has recognized animal protection as a legitimate basis for invoking exceptions to trade rules (as in EC – Seal Products). Secondly, international trade negotiations enhance cooperation on the implementation and enforcement of existing conservation obligations (as in the new Trans-Pacific Partnership’s Environment Chapter).


Eudaimonia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Monique Libardi ◽  
Patricia Glym

International trade law, followed by the development of legal mechanisms for regulation of multilateral trading system, from General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade – GATT (1948–94), Uruguay Round (1986–94) to World Trade Organization – WTO (1995) dispute settlement system is the current scenario of the world economy transactions. This paper aims to analyze whether Brazilian activism in the world trading system may be identified in the WTO Dispute Settlement dealing with the concept of direct effect on international law. Since 1995, Brazil has been an assiduous claimant at the WTO and at the South American Common Market (MERCOSUR) dispute mechanism. However, explaining Brazilian participation at the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) requires a collision between the Brazilian private sector and the political relevance that trade disputes have acquired.


2004 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sungjoon Cho

On August 30, 2002, the World Trade Organization (WTO) authorized the European Communities (EC) to suspend its tariff concessions and other obligations toward the United States to the extent of U.S. $4 billion for the latter’s failure to comply with the Appellate Body’s decision that the United States had violated the WTO rules, in particular, the WTO Subsidy Code by providing the prohibited subsidies to foreign sales corporations (FSCs) in the form of tax breaks (the FSC Article 22.6 Report). The sheer scale of the EC’s suspension in response to the U.S. violation is unprecedented, far surpassing the suspensions authorized in two previous cases that invoked the WTO enforcement mechanism, Banana III and Hormones. At first glance, this dramatic finale for such a high-profile case might be welcomed as an impressive revelation of the real achievement of the WTO system equipped with teeth, unlike its predecessor the old GATT.


Author(s):  
Joost Pauwelyn

This chapter argues that the World Trade Organization (WTO) approach to sources of law is legal-positivist, non-teleological, and focused predominantly on the text of WTO covered agreements as explicitly agreed to by WTO members. This approach places heavy reliance on a de facto rule of precedent and an increasing role for non-binding instruments, with little or no reference to academic writings and a limited role for non-WTO rules of international law other than mainly procedural rules of general international law. Moreover, the WTO’s sources doctrine remains relatively traditional or mainstream. It is difficult to speak of a WTO- or trade-specific ‘deviation’ from the general rule of recognition regarding the establishment of sources. At the same time, the WTO experience does have specific features, with a more prominent role for some sources over others and some pushing of the boundaries when it comes to certain less traditional sources of international law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document