Marc Benitah

It is interesting to note that – in contrast to the SCM Agreement’s distinction between the set of ‘prohibited’ subsidies on the one hand, and the set of ‘non-actionable’ and ‘actionable’ subsidies on the other – the draft text on fisheries subsidies uses only the concepts of ‘prohibited’ and ‘not prohibited’

In the new draft SCM, Annex VIII on fisheries Subsidies appears, as indicated by its name, as a simple Annex which is an integral part of the draft SCM by virtue of Article 32.8 of this draft.    This is however a fiction since Annex VIII on fisheries subsidies is

I have just had a look at the new draft Annex VIII of the SCM on fisheries subsidies.  There is a lot to say on this Annex but there was a point that I impatiently wanted to check, namely the recognition or not for the first time of the concept

The interpretation of the term "allowing"  in Article 12.9 of the SCM by the AB in Korea DRAMs is based on a decisive mistake. It feigns to read the word "allowing"  as a term which concerns the investigative authorities and that these are the ones

Like many persons, my pronostic was that the 2007 Nobel price in Economics would go to Jagdish Bhagwati. My intuition was that this would have been a way of helping the Doha Round in the same way that the Al Gore Nobel prize is a way of helping Kyoto. Following

In a recent note, Gary Hufbauer envisages a possible bargain between the United States and China where in exchange of concessions by China about "currency practices and other issues, the United States could declare China a market economy." My impression is that this scenario could very well turn

The recent panel report about Japan - DRAMS offers an interesting and somewhat irritating example of how a word could loose completely its ordinary meaning through a WTO panel’s interpretation. No wonder that we will hear once again the accusation of "judicial activism". Article 12.9 of

A disturbing and recurring theme in WTO Panel proceedings is the accusation that panelists are "making the case" for one of the parties. This is a serious accusation and panelists try to avoid it by repeating the mantra that they are aware of their limits. This mantra however

In previous posts and comments on this Blog, it was underlined by many that, on the issue of currency manipulation, international trade law cannot be seen in "clinical isolation" from the role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Article XV of GATT 1994  makes this clinical isolation difficult

I was puzzled recently by an affirmation in a newspaper that a complainant country has some 90 percent chances of winning its case at the WTO. Since no domestic legal system has such a tendency, I tried to see if this figure could be confirmed. Unfortunately, in their interesting new