In a recent article entitled "THE TRIALS OF WINNING AT THE WTO: WHAT LIES BEHIND BRAZIL'S SUCCESS", the authors ( Shaffer, Ratton Sanchez, Rosenberg ) underline as factors explaining this success:
a) Brazil's successful use of the system through hiring talented U.S. litigators
b)Brazil's sophisticated use of WTO litigation through working with outside attorneys and economic consultants. Over the last years, parties increasingly use econometric studies to support a WTO claim, hiring economic consultants to work with outside lawyers.
They conclude with a pessimistic note for developing countries:
I know that the authors of the article are "legal realists" who like to underline this kind of institutional aspects. But would not it be simpler to say that Brazil had a solid case from a legal point of view? Antigua won its case without the resources of Brazil.
NB: The exact reference for the article is 41 Cornell Int'l L.J. 383