Legitimate Economic Efficiency in International Trade Law: Externalities and the Future of WTO Dispute Settlement

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Frederik Keustermans
2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-406
Author(s):  
WILLIAM J. DAVEY

John Jackson bestrode the world of international trade law like a Colossus. His 1969 treatise on World Trade and the Law of GATT was called the bible of GATT law. His 1977 casebook on Legal Problems of International Economic Relations created a new law school course and introduced thousands of students around the globe to international trade law. It was the leading international trade law casebook for decades, and his students went on to positions of responsibility throughout the world in governments, international organizations, and private practice. His analysis of GATT infirmities convinced certain influential governments to push for a new international trade organization, which eventually saw life as the World Trade Organization. It was a great honor for me to have been associated with John for over thirty years. Indeed, his 1985 invitation to join as a co-author of the casebook after my first year in law teaching undoubtedly saved me many years of drudgery as a corporate/securities law scholar. Thus, I am pleased to offer some thoughts on John's influence on dispute settlement under GATT and the WTO.


2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 198-200
Author(s):  
Natalie Y. Morris-Sharma

These remarks approach the panel topic of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) at the crossroads, by reflecting on the ongoing discussions on ISDS reform that are taking place at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). There are three sets of factors likely to inform how ISDS is being transformed.


Eudaimonia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Monique Libardi ◽  
Patricia Glym

International trade law, followed by the development of legal mechanisms for regulation of multilateral trading system, from General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade – GATT (1948–94), Uruguay Round (1986–94) to World Trade Organization – WTO (1995) dispute settlement system is the current scenario of the world economy transactions. This paper aims to analyze whether Brazilian activism in the world trading system may be identified in the WTO Dispute Settlement dealing with the concept of direct effect on international law. Since 1995, Brazil has been an assiduous claimant at the WTO and at the South American Common Market (MERCOSUR) dispute mechanism. However, explaining Brazilian participation at the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) requires a collision between the Brazilian private sector and the political relevance that trade disputes have acquired.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 182
Author(s):  
Koesrianti Koesrianti

ASEAN Charter 2007 as ‘constitution’ of ASEAN aims to establish ASEAN Community (AC) in 2015 that ASEAN constitutes as a rule-based organization. ASEAN Community consists of three pillars, namely, ASEAN Political Security Community (APSC), ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), and ASEAN Socio Cultural Community (ASCC). AEC will posses as the lead for the Communities. The objective of AEC is to form a single market and production base with some priority sectors. Accordingly, many economic regional organizations provide Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM) to resolve disputes that may arise among the member countries. The dispute mechanism aims to provide predictability and security in international trade by providing strict time-frames, and was designed to be mutually agreed by the disputing members, flexible and binding. ASEAN trade DSM is designed as a legalistic mechanism. This paper examines DSM in ASEAN, especially economic disputes in the context of international trade law. In doing so, this paper analyzes DSM provided in the ASEAN Charter by comparing to DSM in the WTO context.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document