This is from some Congressional testimony by economist Phil Levy: In the absence of new agreements, there is a temptation to seek satisfaction through the aggressive use of venues such as the WTO dispute settlement mechanism -- litigation in lieu of negotiation. This poses a serious long-term threat to the

Here's the U.S. - Tuna panel's ultimate finding under TBT Agreement Article 2.2: 7.620 In light of our determinations above in relation to both objectives of the US dolphin-safe provisions, we find that these measures are more trade-restrictive than necessary to fulfil their

The Cloves panel analysis of TBT Art. 2 is fascinating. Given the structure of TBT Art. 2.1-2.2, and the absence of an explicit GATT Art. XX exception in TBT, I have long wondered how to read TBT 2.1 (national treatment) with TBT 2.2 (necessity) (see my

Not too surprisingly, Todd Tucker of Global Trade Watch is unhappy with the recent WTO panel ruling in the Clove Cigarettes case, where the panel found that a U.S. law which bans clove cigarettes while allowing menthol cigarettes violates the National Treatment obligation of the TBT Agreement.  In a

... is here:  http://www.worldtradelaw.net/na/ds398-10(na).pdf  Here's one aspect I'll be watching closely: III. APPEAL OF THE PANEL'S FINDING THAT CHINA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVOKE ARTICLE XX OF THE GATT 1994 IN DEFENSE OF A CLAIM UNDER