DSU Article 11

This morning I watched a very interesting IIEL event on "Rethinking the WTO: Opportunities for Transatlantic Cooperation," moderated by Joost Pauwelyn, and featuring Sabine Weyand, Jennifer Hillman, Thomas Graham, and Henry Gao as panelists. (I think they will post the recorded video at some point.) One thing Tom

In the past, I have argued that because the substance of DSU Article 11 existed in the GATT prior to the creation of the DSU, this provision was not designed to be used with the DSU appeals process. But I was poking around in some DSU negotiating history recently, and

DSU Article 11 provides the following: Article 11: Function of Panels The function of panels is to assist the DSB in discharging its responsibilities under this Understanding and the covered agreements. Accordingly, a panel should make an objective assessment of the matter before it, including an objective assessment of the

At the June 29 DSB meeting, in the context of discussing the Australia - Plain Packaging AB report, the U.S. made the following comment on DSU Article 11 appeals: As the United States has explained, and Members know well, Article 17.6 of the DSU limits an appeal “to

Last week I blogged about U.S. concerns with DSU Article 11. In the U.S. view, the Appellate Body has set the standard for such appeals too low (if such appeals should be allowed at all), leading to a proliferation of such appeals and contributing to the slowdown in

USTR's 121 page "Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization"  is here. A lot of it seems to have been taken from U.S. statements to the DSB over the past couple years, although I have only skimmed it at this point. For

In the hope of pushing the substantive discussion related to the Appellate Body crisis forward, here is a brief response to a couple points the U.S. made at the General Council meeting yesterday. First up, the U.S. says the following about the issue of "precedent": On