GIOVANNA ADINOLFI, L'Organizzazione mondiale del commercio. Profili istituzionali e normativi (The World Trade Organization. Institutional and Legal Aspects), Padova, Cedam, 2001, pp. 373; MARCELLA DISTEFANO, Soluzione delle controversie nell'OMC e diritto internazionale (Dispute Settlement in the WTO and International Law), Padova, Cedam, 2001, pp. 249; MICHELE VELLANO, L'Organo d'appello dell'OMC (The WTO Appellate Body), Napoli, Jovene, 2001, pp. 360.

2001 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 474-478 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
Wto Appellate Body

United States—Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Shaffer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Production Methods ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
First Time

In a Mexican challenge against U.S. criteria for labeling tuna products as “dolphin-safe,” the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO), on May 16, 2012, held against the United States while reversing various findings of the panel. The case was one of three WTO Appellate Body decisions issued in 2012 that interpreted and applied the key substantive provisions of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement or TBT) for the first time. Systemically, the decision is important for its interpretation of the TBT Agreement’s substantive obligations, the types of labeling that fall within the scope of the Agreement, the legitimacy of labeling based on foreign process and production methods (PPMs), and the relation of other international law to WTO law.

scholarly journals U.S. Refusal to Appoint Members Renders WTO Appellate Body Unable to Hear New Appeals

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 518-525
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Appellate Body Report ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
Bona Fide ◽  
Wto Appellate Body

Over the last few years, the United States has been pressuring the World Trade Organization (WTO) to reform the Appellate Body by refusing proposals to fill vacancies. On December 10, 2019, the terms of two Appellate Body members expired, leaving one member left for the seven-member body. This has brought new appeals to a standstill, as an appeal from a panel established by the Dispute Settlement Body must be heard by three Appellate Body members. In February of 2020, the United States elaborated on its complaints about the Appellate Body in a report published by the Office of the United States Trade Representative. In the spring of 2020, in response to the continued U.S. resistance to filling vacancies on the Appellate Body, a group of WTO members established an interim arrangement to handle appeals through arbitration. Also in the spring of 2020, the United States described as invalid a recent Appellate Body report regarding a dispute between Canada and the United States, asserting that none of the three persons who issued the report were in fact bona fide Appellate Body members.

scholarly journals United States Continues to Block New Appellate Body Members for the World Trade Organization, Risking the Collapse of the Appellate Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 822-831 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Selection Processes ◽  
The World ◽  
Wto Appellate Body

With only three remaining members of what is supposed to be a seven-member body, the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Appellate Body may soon cease to function. Since 2016, the United States has blocked the reappointment of Appellate Body members and rejected over a dozen proposals to launch selection processes that could fill the remaining vacancies. As a lead reason for these blocks, the United States has cited concerns about the practice whereby members whose terms have expired continue to serve on appeals to which they were previously appointed. On December 10, 2019, the terms of two Appellate Body members will expire, leaving only one member remaining. Because the WTO's dispute settlement process requires three Appellate Body members for each appeal, WTO members will be unable to make any new appeals by this year's end unless a solution emerges to the current impasse.

Commentary on the Doha Round: Institutional Issues

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1850065
Author(s):  
Debra P Steger
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Uruguay Round ◽  
Doha Round ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
The University

Commentary on Robert Howse's article "WTO Governance and the Doha Round." Debra Steger is Executive in Residence at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law where she is working to establish a new institute for international law, economy and security in Canada. Previously, she was Senior Counsel with Thomas & Partners, a law firm specializing in international trade and investment matters. From 1995-2001, she served as the founding Director of the Appellate Body Secretariat of the World Trade Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, during which time she helped to establish the Appellate Body as the first appellate tribunal in international trade. She is Chair of the Trade and Customs Law Committee of the International Bar Association, and has been on the executive of the Trade Committee of the International Law Association for the past 10 years. She is also a member of the Editorial Advisory Board of the Journal for International Economic Law. She participates on the Advisory Council of the UNCTAD Project on Building Capacity through Training in Dispute Settlement in International Trade Investment and Intellectual Property as well as the Governing Council of the World Trade Law Association. During the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, she was the Senior Negotiator for Canada on Dispute Settlement and the Establishment of the World Trade Organization as well as the Principal Legal Counsel to the Government of Canada for all of the Uruguay Round agreements. From 1991—1995, she was General Counsel of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal in Ottawa, the agency responsible for administering the antidumping, countervail, safeguards, and government procurement legislation in Canada. Her most recent book is entitled: “Peace Through Trade: Building the WTO” which was published by Cameron May International Legal Publishers in 2004. Steger holds an LL.M. from the University of Michigan Law School, an LL.B. from the University of Victoria Faculty of Law, and a B.A. (Honours) in History from the University of British Columbia.

scholarly journals The Future of Amicus Participation at the WTO: Implications of the Sardines Decision and Suggestions for Further Developments

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Keller
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Public Access ◽  
Democratic Participation ◽  
Global Society ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
The Future

In today's increasingly interdependent global society, international institutions formerly committed to operating as insular systems recognizing only states as legitimate participants have come under pressure to open their processes to public view and participation. The World Trade Organization (WTO) in particular has been widely criticized for its lack of transparency and democratic participation. Nowhere has this criticism been more prevalent than in the arena of dispute settlement. The controversy over the acceptance of amicus briefs at the WTO reflects the tensions among WTO members and non-members concerning greater public access to dispute settlement proceedings. This battle has been fought primarily through the Appellate Body and its important series of decisions on amicus briefs.

Reviewing dispute settlement at the World Trade Organization: a time to reconsider the role/s of compensation?

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
ARWEL DAVIES
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Financial Compensation ◽  
Unilateral Action ◽  
Natural Time ◽  
The World ◽  
Do So

The World Trade Organization provides a forum for the settlement of trade disputes arising between its 148 Members. Should consultations fail, the parties may choose to initiate formal proceedings in Geneva, and must do so in preference to taking unilateral action. The dispute settlement rules are presently under review with a view to their clarification and improvement, making this a natural time to ask whether the appropriate strategy has been identified. This article focuses on the functions of compensation in the overall context of WTO remedies. Particular attention is given to the prospects for new disciplines and increased practice connected with the granting of both trade compensation and financial compensation. Also considered is the extent to which financial compensation can and should be linked to reparation in the sense of correcting the injury caused by WTO violations. The discussion is informed by the general international law position, by proposals made during the on-going review process and by emerging dispute settlement practice.

scholarly journals The Law on State Responsibility and the World Trade Organization

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 759-803
Author(s):  
Anna Ventouratou
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
The World ◽  
The Law

Abstract This paper examines the role of general international law in the World Trade Organization (WTO) regime, using the rules on state responsibility as a case study. It identifies and discusses instances in WTO case law where such rules were applied directly or were taken into consideration in interpreting relevant WTO provisions. The analysis demonstrates that direct application of general international law for the determination of indispensable matters not regulated by the WTO Agreements is part of the inherent powers of WTO adjudicative bodies. Moreover, under Article 3(2) Dispute Settlement Understanding and Article 31(3)(c) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, WTO adjudicative bodies have an obligation to take into account general international law in interpreting relevant WTO provisions. The paper delineates the methodology for assessing the interaction between general international law and WTO law and highlights the importance of adhering to this methodology to provide clarity and legal certainty regarding the scope and content of WTO obligations.

scholarly journals Global Governance: The World Trade Organization’s Contribution

2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 1061
Author(s):  
Andrew D. Mitchell ◽  
Elizabeth Sheargold
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Current System ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The World ◽  
Wto Agreements

Democracy and administrative law concern ideas of governance, legitimacy, and accountability. With the growth of bureaucracy and regulation, many democratic theorists would argue that administrative law mechanisms are essential to achieving democratic objectives. This article considers the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) contribution to governance both in terms of global administrative law and democracy. In relation to administrative law, it first explores the extent to which the WTO’s own dispute settlement process contributes to this area. Second, it considers the operation of administrative law principles embedded within the WTO Agreements on Members. For example, the WTO Agreements require that certain laws be administered “in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner.” This obligation was recently considered by the Appellate Body, but uncertainty remains about the scope this provision has to permit WTO panels to review domestic administrative practices. In relation to the WTO’s contribution to democracy, this article first considers the challenges and limitations of the current system of decision making within the WTO and compares it to democratic theory. Second, it examines how democracies comply with the findings of WTO dispute settlement tribunals and how compliance could be improved. It concludes by speculating on the implications of this discussion for public international law more broadly.

scholarly journals Demystifying the Prudential Carve-out: A proposal

Con-texto ◽  
2015 ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Samuel Trujillo
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
International Law ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Highly Qualified ◽  
Prudential Regulation ◽  
The World

<p>This article explores how the broadest spirited exception in the framework of the World Trade Organization, commonly referred to as the prudential carve-out, could be applied without adding to or diminishing the rights and obligations of WTO Members. It argues that through the customary rules of interpretation of international law, the only standard applicable to the prudential carve out is that of a reasonable means to ends connection. However, this broad standard of review can be enriched by expert knowledge on financial and prudential regulation, given that the form of dispute settlement established in the Annex to Financial Services of the GATS provides a window for dissecting the concept of “prudential”. The AFS requires that an “expert panel” decide on controversies regarding financial and prudential issues, instead of the ordinary “highly qualified” WTO panel. The article draws on principles developed by the disciplines of micro- and macroprudential regulation to exemplify how expert knowledge can guide an otherwise vague standard of review.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document