Book contents
- International Economic Dispute Settlement
- International Economic Dispute Settlement
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Contracting v. Multilateralism in Global Economic Governance
- Part I Current Challenges in International Trade Dispute Settlement
- 3 Sausage-Making at the WTO
- 4 Operationalizing MPIA Appeal Arbitrations:
- 5 Re-Designing the WTO Mediation Mechanism
- 6 Adjudication vs “Frontier Justice” in International Economic Law Disputes
- 7 WTO Dispute Settlement: “Will of the Strongest” or “Rule of Law”? Attempting to View Recent U.S. Actions through the Proper Lens
- Part II Current Challenges in International Investment Dispute Settlement
- Part III New Issue Areas and Dispute Settlement
- Part IV Regional Approaches for International Economic Dispute Settlement
- Index
- References
4 - Operationalizing MPIA Appeal Arbitrations:
Opportunities and Challenges
from Part I - Current Challenges in International Trade Dispute Settlement
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 August 2021
Book contents
- International Economic Dispute Settlement
- International Economic Dispute Settlement
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Contracting v. Multilateralism in Global Economic Governance
- Part I Current Challenges in International Trade Dispute Settlement
- 3 Sausage-Making at the WTO
- 4 Operationalizing MPIA Appeal Arbitrations:
- 5 Re-Designing the WTO Mediation Mechanism
- 6 Adjudication vs “Frontier Justice” in International Economic Law Disputes
- 7 WTO Dispute Settlement: “Will of the Strongest” or “Rule of Law”? Attempting to View Recent U.S. Actions through the Proper Lens
- Part II Current Challenges in International Investment Dispute Settlement
- Part III New Issue Areas and Dispute Settlement
- Part IV Regional Approaches for International Economic Dispute Settlement
- Index
- References
Summary
For the first time since its establishment, on 11 December 2019, the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) did not have the requisite number of Appellate Body Members to form a Division to adjudicate disputes. This date had been long anticipated in international trade circles and was precipitated by an unfortunate sequence of events. At the centre of these, was the dissatisfaction of the United States with, inter alia, the functioning of the Appellate Body.
The demise of the Appellate Body as it existed since 1 January 1995 has reverberated far beyond the WTO’s dispute settlement system. It brings to the fore the delicate balance of ideas and opinions that have been at the core of decision making at the WTO since the Uruguay Round.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- International Economic Dispute SettlementDemise or Transformation?, pp. 68 - 96Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Andersen, S. et al. 2017 “Using Arbitration Under Article 25 of The DSU to Ensure the Availability of Appeals,” CTEI-2017–17, CTEI Working Papers.Google Scholar
Bacchus, J. 2018. “Saving the WTO’s Appeals Process,” Cato at Liberty, 12 October 2018, www.cato.org/blog/saving-wtos-appeals-process. Accessed on 20 October 2019.Google Scholar
Davey, W. J. 2009. “Compliance Problems in WTO Dispute Settlement,” Cornell International Law Journal: 42(1): 119–28.Google Scholar
Hughes, V. 2004. “7. Arbitration with the WTO.” In Ortino, F. and Petersmann, E-U. (Eds.), The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995–2003. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, pp. 78–9.Google Scholar
Jaswant, S. 2020. “Arbitration in the WTO: Changing Regimes Under the New Multi-party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement,” 14 May 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/05/14/arbitration-in-the-wto-changing-regimes-under-the-new-multi-party-interim-appeal-arbitration-arrangement/?doing_wp_cron=1598359995.3023118972778320312500. Accessed on 23 August 2020.Google Scholar
Lester, S. 2020. “The New Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement Pursuant to Article 25 of the DSU,” https://ielp.worldtradelaw.net/dsu-25-interim-appeals/. Accessed on 23 August 2020.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2019. “WTO Dispute Settlement Post 2019: What to Expect?,” Journal of International Economic Law 22(3): 297–321.Google Scholar
Vidigal, G. 2019. “Living Without the Appellate Body: Multilateral, Bilateral and Plurilateral Solutions to the WTO Dispute Settlement Crisis,” Journal of World Investment & Trade 20(20): 862–90.Google Scholar
WTO JurisprudenceGoogle Scholar
Appellate Body Report, Canada – Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC – Hormones Dispute, WT/DS321/AB/R, adopted 14 November 2008, DSR 2008:XIV, p. 5373.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, India – Measures Affecting the Automotive Sector, WT/DS146/AB/R, WT/DS175/AB/R, adopted 5 April 2002, DSR 2002:V, p. 1821.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, Indonesia – Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products, WT/DS490/AB/R, WT/DS496/AB/R, and Add.1, adopted 27 August 2018, DSR 2018:VII, p. 3393.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, Japan – Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1 November 1996, DSR 1996:I, p. 97.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, Morocco – Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel from Turkey, WT/DS513/AB/R and Add.1, adopted 8 January 2020.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, United States – Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC – Hormones Dispute, WT/DS320/AB/R, adopted 14 November 2008, DSR 2008:X, p. 3507.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, United States – Final Anti-Dumping Measures on Stainless Steel from Mexico, WT/DS344/AB/R, adopted 20 May 2008, DSR 2008:II, p. 513.Google Scholar
Appellate Body Report, United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products – Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia, WT/DS58/AB/RW, adopted 21 November 2001, DSR 2001:XIII, p. 6481.Google Scholar
Award of the Arbitrator, European Communities – The ACP-EC Partnership Agreement – Recourse to Arbitration Pursuant to the Decision of 14 November 2001, WT/L/616, 1 August 2005, DSR 2005:XXIII, p. 11669.Google Scholar
Award of the Arbitrator, United States – Section 110 (5)of the US Copyright Act – Recourse to Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU, WT/DS160/ARB25/1, 9 November 2001, DSR 2001:II, p. 667.Google Scholar
Panel Report, European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/R, adopted 1 June 2011, as modified by Appellate Body Report WT/DS316/AB/R, DSR 2011:II, p. 685.Google Scholar
Panel Report, European Communities – Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Complaint by Ecuador, WT/DS27/R/ECU, adopted 25 September 1997, as modified by Appellate Body Report WT/DS27/AB/R, DSR 1997:III, p. 1085.Google Scholar
Panel Report, Guatemala – Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Grey Portland Cement from Mexico, WT/DS156/R, adopted 17 November 2000, DSR 2000:XI, p. 5295.Google Scholar
Panel Report, Indonesia – Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products, WT/DS490/R, WT/DS496/R, and Add.1, adopted 27 August 2018, as modified by Appellate Body Report WT/DS490/AB/R, WT/DS496/AB/R, DSR 2018:VII, p. 3707.Google Scholar
Panel Report, United States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (Second Complaint), WT/DS353/R, adopted 23 March 2012, as modified by Appellate Body Report WT/DS353/AB/R, DSR 2012:II, p. 649.Google Scholar
WTO Documents (negotiating history, meeting minutes, notifications)Google Scholar
Annex to Recourse to Article 25 of the DSU, para. 2, WT/DS160/15, 3 August 2001.Google Scholar
Canada – Measures Concerning Trade in Commercial Aircraft (Brazil), “Agreed Procedures for Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU,” WT/DS522/20, 3 June 2020.Google Scholar
Canada – Measures Governing the Sale of Wine (Australia), “Agreed Procedures for Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU,” WT/DS537/15, 3 June 2020.Google Scholar
Colombia – Anti-Dumping Duties on Frozen Fries from Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands, “Agreed Procedures for Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU,” WT/DS591/3, 15 July 2020.Google Scholar
Communication from Switzerland, “Arbitration within GATT,” MTN.GNG/NG13/W/33, 19 July 1989, paras 2, 9, 11, 12.Google Scholar
Costa Rica – Measures Concerning the Importation of Fresh Avocados from Mexico, “Agreed Procedures for Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU,” WT/DS524/5, 3 June 2020.Google Scholar
Draft Decision on the Functioning of the Appellate Body, WT/GC/W/791, 28 November 2019.Google Scholar
Draft Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, MTN.TNC/W/35/Rev.1, 3 December 1990.Google Scholar
DSU in Draft Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, MTN.TNC/W/FA, 20 December 1991.Google Scholar
Minutes of the DSB Meeting of 22 May 2017, WT/DSB/M/397, 18 August 2017, paras 7.1–7.24.Google Scholar
Minutes of the DSB Meeting of 22 November 2019, WT/DSB/M/437, 30 January 2020, paras 3.1–3.4.Google Scholar
Minutes of the DSB Meeting of 18 December 2019, WT/DSB/M/438, 25 February 2020, paras 1.22–1.26.Google Scholar
Note by the Secretariat, “Concept, Forms and Effects of Arbitration,” MTN.GNG/NG13/W/20, 22 February 1988, paras 12–17.Google Scholar
Note by the Secretariat, “Summary and Comparative Analysis of Proposal for Negotiations,” MTN.GNG/NG13/W/14, 3 November 1987, paras 72–4.Google Scholar
Notification of a Mutually Satisfactory Temporary Arrangement, WT/DS160/23, 26 June 2003.Google Scholar
Recourse to Article 25 of the DSU, WT/DS160/15, 3 August 2001.Google Scholar
Report by DSB Chair Amb. David Walker to the General Council on the Areas of Convergence, JOB/GC/222, 15 October 2019.Google Scholar
“Statement on a Mechanism for Developing, Documenting and Sharing Practices and Procedures in the Conduct of WTO Disputes,” Addendum, JOB/DSB/1/Add.11, 25 July 2019, as amended by JOB/DSB/1/Add.11/Rev.1, 22 October 2019, para. 7.Google Scholar
“Statement on a Mechanism for Developing, Documenting and Sharing Practices and Procedures in the Conduct of WTO Disputes,” Addendum, JOB/DSB/1/Add.11/Suppl.1, 21 October 2019, para. 7.Google Scholar
“Statement on a Mechanism for Developing, Documenting and Sharing Practices and Procedures in the Conduct of WTO Disputes,” Addendum, JOB/DSB/1/Add.12, 30 April 2020.Google Scholar
“Statement on a Mechanism for Developing, Documenting and Sharing Practices and Procedures in the Conduct of WTO Disputesv” Supplement, JOB/DSB/1/Add.12/Suppl.5, 3 August 2020.Google Scholar
Understanding Between Indonesia and Chinese Taipei Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU in Indonesia – Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products, WT/DS490/13, 15 April 2019.Google Scholar
Understanding Between Indonesia and Viet Nam Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU in Indonesia – Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products, WT/DS496/14, 27 March 2019.Google Scholar
Understanding Between the Republic of Korea and United States Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU in United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea, WT/DS488/16, 10 February 2020.Google Scholar
United States – Section 110 (5) of the US Copyright Act, Status Report by the United States, WT/DS160/24/Add.178, 17 January 2020.Google Scholar
Official government documents/reportsGoogle Scholar
European Commission, Statement by Ministers, Davos, Switzerland, 24 January 2020, https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/january/tradoc_158596.pdf. Accessed on 28 February 2020.Google Scholar
United States Trade Representative, Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization, February 2020, https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Report_on_the_Appellate_Body_of_the_World_Trade_Organization.pdf. Accessed on 14 August 2020.Google Scholar