Simon Lester

This is from Dani Rodrik in the FT: How will the world trade regime handle a large, increasingly powerful country such as China that apparently plays globalisation by different rules? This is the question that keeps US and European policymakers awake at night. The fever runs highest in the US,

The notice of appeal filed by Honduras in the Australia - Plain Packaging case is here. I think it's fair to say that it covers a lot of ground. This is one part: Honduras requests the Appellate Body's review of the assessment the Panel made of

Following up on their complaint, this is from a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the American Institute for International Steel and two companies last week: SECTION 232 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS AN IMPROPER DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY AND A VIOLATION OF SEPARATION OF POWERS. Plaintiffs’ nondelegation challenge to section 232

So far, there have been 13 WTO consultations requests related to the Section 232 tariffs and the subsequent retaliation. Here are the 8 requests against the Section 232 tariffs, which allege violations of the GATT, and also allege that the tariffs are safeguard measures and violate the Safeguards Agreement: U.

Bryce Baschuk of Bloomberg has posted a European Commission document with some WTO modernization proposals.  This is from the part on dispute settlement: EU position: Without prejudice to EU position on whether the concerns formulated by the United States are well founded, this paper explores avenues in which addressing these

I had been wondering if the U.S. would bring WTO complaints against the tariffs applied by various governments in retaliation for the Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. USTR has just announced that it will: The United States today launched separate disputes at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against

As I discussed recently, the U.S. has raised the issue of the length of time it has been taking the Appellate Body to circulate its reports. But what about the length of time panels have been taking? DSU Articles 12.8 and 12.9 say this: 8. In order

Back in 2000, the Appellate Body said this in Korea - Beef about the "necessary" standard in GATT Article XX(d): 164. In sum, determination of whether a measure, which is not "indispensable", may nevertheless be "necessary" within the contemplation of Article XX(d)

Next week is a busy week for international economic law conferences in DC. On Wednesday, Georgetown's Institute of International Economic Law and the Graduate Institute Center for Trade and Economic Integration will host the G2 Conference on Resolving Disputes in International Economic Law. And then on Thursday, Friday,

This is from Axios: Axios has obtained a leaked draft of a Trump administration bill — ordered by the president himself — that would declare America’s abandonment of fundamental World Trade Organization rules. Why it matters: The draft legislation is stunning. The bill essentially provides Trump a license to raise U.