Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T20:12:50.028Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appellate Body Report, United States – Clove Cigarettes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Benn McGrady
Benn McGrady*
Affiliation:
O’Neil Institute for NationalandGlobal Health Law, Georgetown University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In September 2011, the World Trade Organization (WTO) released the report of a panel tasked with considering a complaint brought by Indonesia concerning prohibitions on certain flavored tobacco products implemented by the United States (US). The panel concluded that the US violated WTO law and recommended that the US be asked to bring its laws into conformity with WTO law.

The US appealed the panel's decision. The Appellate Body of the WTO upheld the panel report on April 4, 2012. This case note gives a brief overview of the Appellate Body's report and examines the implications for tobacco control and public health more generally.

Type
Case Notes
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 251 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a more detailed case note on the panel report see McGrady, Benn, “Panel Report US – Clove Cigarettes”, 2(4) European Journal of Risk Regulation (2011), pp. 600–606 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 21 U.S.C. § 387g(a)(1)(A).

3 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, HR 1256, section 907(a)(1)(A).

4 Panel Report, United States – Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,(“Panel Report”),WT/DS406/R, para. 7.182.

5 Ibid, para. 7.273.

6 Ibid, para. 7.268.

7 Ibid, para. 7.276.

8 See Ibid, para. 7.291, where the panel refers to the measure as placing costs on Indonesian producers, but not the United States. This aspect of the panel report was criticized in the Appellate Body report for a number of reasons.

9 Ibid, paras 7.373 – 7.374.

10 Ibid, para. 7.401.

11 Ibid, para. 7.414.

12 Ibid, para. 7.422.

13 Ibid, para. 7.425.

14 Ibid, para. 7.427.

15 Appellate Body Report, United States – Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes, (“Appellate Body Report”), WT/DS406/AB/R, 4 April 2012, para. 120.

16 Ibid, para. 160.

17 Ibid, para. 96.

18 Ibid, para. 192.

19 Ibid, para. 174.

20 Ibid, para. 215; See also para. 182.

21 Ibid, para. 224.

22 Ibid, para. 225.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid, para. 225.

25 Ibid, para. 96.

26 Ibid, para. 115.

27 Ibid.

28 See <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds434_e.htm> (last accessed 7 May 2012).

29 Appellate Body Report, para. 142