Simon Lester

With the AB's recent Tuna 21.5 report in mind, I think it's fair to say that the focus when analyzing less favorable treatment tends to be on the "stems exclusively from a legitimate regulatory distinction" element.  I agree that this element is crucial,

I am not as critical as Rob of the AB's Tuna 21.5 report, but I do have some concerns. Let me set them out briefly. First, the Appellate Body said the following about the standard it applies under TBT Article 2.1: 7.153. We have already

Earlier this year, I was speculating about a NAFTA Chapter 11 claim against a U.S. tax provision that had an impact on marijuana businesses, and more generally I've been wondering about ISDS challenges to marijuana regulation.  I thought the first such claim -- or rather, the intent to

This is a guest post from Nataliya Haletska, a PhD student at Ivan Franko Lviv National University, Ukraine I am working on a paper regarding the possibility of bringing territorial disputes under the auspices of the WTO. Particularly, I came to conclusion that the annexation of the part of Ukrainian

I'm sure Rob (and maybe others) will weigh in soon on today's WTO Appellate Body ruling in the Article 21.5 proceeding of U.S. - Tuna, but let me just quickly mention one point that occurs to me.  (The facts of the measure here are complex,

From the TPP cross-border trade in services chapter: Article 10.3: National Treatment2 1. Each Party shall accord to services and service suppliers of another Party treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to its own services and service suppliers. 2 For greater certainty, whether

Via what is referred to as an "associated document" on the Australia DFAT web site, and a "side instrument" on the NZ MFAT web site, Australia and New Zealand have agreed to exclude ISDS as between each other in the TPP: 3. No investor of New

From the U.S. International Trade Commission: The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has instituted an investigation to assess the likely impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement that the President has announced he intends to enter into with Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand,

Russia wants further interpretation of GATT Article XXI to be on the post-Nairobi agenda: Interpretation and Implementation of Security Exceptions provided in the Multilateral Trade Agreements 1.5. With reference to the "Decision Concerning Article XXI of the General Agreement" adopted by the CONTRACTING PARTIES on November

This is from Article 28.11 of the TPP Dispute Settlement Chapter: 3. The panel shall consider this Agreement in accordance with applicable rules of interpretation under international law as reflected in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). In addition, with respect