The trend continues, this time under the GATS.  This is from yesterday's China - Electronic Payment Services panel report: 7.702 In the light of the above, we consider that a likeness determination should be based on arguments and evidence that pertain to the competitive relationship of the services

The Trade, Law, and Development journal has a special issue on WTO dispute settlement. I have a piece in it on the development of standards of appellate review, focusing a bit on appeals of factual issues and issues related to the application of the law to the facts. As I

Via Kevin Heller, here is the opinion of James Crawford on a possible EU ban on trade with the West Bank settlements as it relates to WTO issues: 133. For the sake of completeness, it might also be mentioned that in extending a ban on settlement trade, the EC would

A quote from NZ trade minister Tim Groser: "Of course trade agreements involve concessions over the sovereign rights of countries to do things," he told the Weekend Herald. " That's the point of international law." New Zealand's problem had been the "excess

From law prof Jarrod Wong: The Institute for Transnational Arbitration (ITA) will be holding its Second Annual Winter Forum at the Biltmore Hotel in Miami, Florida on January 24-25, 2013. The first half of the Winter Forum will showcase two works-in-progress selected pursuant to a Call-for-

I mentioned the WTO law of foie gras bans here.  A WTO complaint may be unlikely, but apparently a commerce clause challenge (along with due process challenges as well) has begun.  Here is an excerpt from the complaint: 14 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 15 Declaratory Relief - Violation of the Commerce

Andrew Mitchell and I are editing a forthcoming special issue on Legal Issues in Tobacco Control in Transnational Dispute Management. It will examine legal issues surrounding international related disputes arising from tobacco regulation and control. This is a particularly urgent topic for examination in view of the ongoing investment arbitration

What struck me the most reading the recent AB report on COOL, is how, for the third time in a row, the AB found a violation of discrimination (under TBT Art. 2.1), but shied away from finding the measure “more trade restrictive than necessary” (pursuant to TBT Art. 2.

That's the question Rob and Joanna asked here.  Here's how I see it (and by that I mean, here's how I think it should be, not how it currently is in the jurisprudence!). There are three elements to determining whether a measure is discriminatory.