Following up on this post, blog reader Laurens Ankersmit points me to an EU General Court order deciding that the action brought against the seal product ban under EU law was inadmissible  because the applicants did not have standing, on the basis that they were not  directly and individually concerned

There's still lots to uncover in the Tuna panel report.  Here's something on PPMs: 7.369 Finally, Mexico contends that the US measures unilaterally exert pressure on the Mexican fleet to change fishing areas and/or fishing methods, which Mexico argues is evidence of the de

Dear all, I am intrigued by the US Tuna Panel’s approach to the question of whether the US used the AIDCP standards (which incidentally are resolutions passed by contracting parties to the Agreement on International Dolphin Conservation Program) as a basis for its dolphin-safe labelling provisions. At one point,

From a State Department press release: The United States Senate approved the United States-Rwanda Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) on September 26 by unanimous consent. The Department of State applauds the Senate’s approval of the treaty and is pleased that the Senate’s longstanding tradition of bipartisan support for these

As noted previously, the Institute for Transnational Arbitration has issued a call for papers for its First Annual Winter Forum: THE INSTITUTE FOR TRANSNATIONAL ARBITRATION 1st Annual Winter Forum Stanford Court Renaissance San Francisco Hotel San Francisco, California February 2-3, 2012 CALL FOR PAPERS In collaboration with the Academic Council,

It's easy to get distracted with all of the interesting aspects of Clove Cigarettes and Tuna, but let's not forget that there is another non-discrimination case going on:  Philippines - Distilled Spirits.  This case deals with GATT Article III:2.  Here is the Philippines' notice

One interesting part of the recent Tuna-Dolphin panel report is the different views of the panelists on whether the U.S. dolphin-safe labelling measure is a "technical regulation" under the TBT Agreement.   The panel majority found that the the measure is a "technical regulation"; the dissenter