Here's something else from USTR's 2018 Trade Policy Agenda and 2017 Annual Report: iv. Appellate Body Review of facts and review of a Member’s domestic law de novo Another significant concern is the Appellate Body’s approach to reviewing facts. Article 17.6 of the

Here's a concise summary of what is happening with the Section 232 steel/aluminum tariffs: President Trump said some things yesterday about tariffs on steel and aluminum. We'll find out next week (or later) what, if anything, it means.

A while back, I said I would be trying to gather some evidence on the relative impact of appeals to NAFTA Chapter 19 vs. appeals to the U.S. Court of International Trade. Well, I finally have some data, but let me clarify in all caps that it is PRELIMINARY

This is from Georgetown's Institute of International Economic Law and the Graduate Institute, Geneva's Center for Trade and Economic Integration:Georgetown's Institute of International Economic Law and the Graduate Institute, Geneva's Center for Trade and Economic Integration will be hosting a one-day

In a new Issue Brief, which it describes as "a product of discussions between IIEL faculty, students and stakeholders," Georgetown's Institute of International Economic Law has the following proposals for reforming the Appellate Body transition rules: Proposal 1: Limit Carry-Over to Disputes Where the Hearing Has

As we all know, "should" means something very different from "shall." Except when it doesn't. This is from the Korea - Radionuclides panel report circulated last week: 7.9.5.1 Does Annex C(1)(g) impose a positive obligation? 7.426. Japan relies

Debra Steger passes along information on an international law professor position at the University of Ottawa: The Common Law Section of the Faculty of Law at the University of Ottawa invites applications for the following tenure-track faculty positions. Title of the position: Assistant Professor or Associate Professor Area of expertise:

Those of you who read the original version of this post, Simon Lester has pointed out that there may be a confusion.  Please disregard, til I come back with something more developed.

This is from Inside US Trade: During a meeting with their U.S. counterparts this week, Canadian negotiators will pitch the elimination of the deal’s investor-state dispute settlement provision -- and the U.S. is expected to agree to that proposal, allowing for what private-sector and congressional sources called