General exceptions under the GATS - A Legal Commentary on Article XIV GATS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Delimatsis ◽  
Léo Gargne
Keyword(s):  
General Exceptions

Introductory Note

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Gomula
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Green Energy ◽  
Illicit Trade ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Gatt 1994 ◽  
Combat Money Laundering ◽  
Wto Agreements

In 2016, panel and Appellate Body reports were adopted in seven disputes. The majority of the disputes concerned general obligations under two basic WTO agreements: the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 (GATT 1994) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Therefore, the 2016 reports provide valuable analytical resources on basic GATT and GATS concepts, and the respective general exceptions clauses. The other disputes concerned anti-dumping and countervailing duty measures. Two disputes involving Latin American states related to measures imposed in order to combat money laundering and tax evasion, and raised the question of whether GATT tariff obligations apply to “illicit trade”. Two other disputes related to the use of green energy, including the promotion of solar cells and modules, and anti-dumping duties on imports of biodiesel.

Reasons, Institutions, Authorities

2020 ◽  
pp. 375-400
Author(s):  
Oisin Suttle
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Service Conception ◽  
The Law ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Trade Remedies ◽  
Domestic Regulation

This chapter examines the logic of exceptions in World Trade Organization (WTO) law, and their relation to the reasons that apply to members, and to the authority of WTO law and adjudicators. Many exceptions can be understood as qualifying rules, in order that those rules should better track the reasons that apply to those subject to them. However, others are better explained as reflecting the limits of law’s authority: at least sometimes, exceptions identify areas wherein the law falls silent, not because its subjects necessarily have reasons to act otherwise than in accordance with the unqualified rule, but rather because they have good claims to decide for themselves whether they should so act. Joseph Raz’s service conception of authority is applied to develop an account of the grounds, scope, and limits of WTO law’s authority, which account is in turn applied to explain three specific sets of exceptions or quasi-exceptions: the GATT Article XX General Exceptions, the trade remedies rules, and the ‘non-exception-exceptions’ for domestic regulation deviating from international standards.

scholarly journals Indigenous Interests and the Chapeau of Article XX: Equality of What?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 300-307
Author(s):  
Alexia Herwig
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
General Exceptions

My analysis focuses on a limited aspect of the Appellate Body’s (AB) EC—Seal Products decision under the chapeau of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). It is revelatory for the kind of discrimination at issue under the chapeau in surprising ways.The general exceptions in Article XX serve to justify measures infringing other GATT provisions that have a close nexus to a list of types of public policies. The list of public policies is exhaustive. The chapeau prohibits application of those measures that arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between countries where the same conditions prevail or that constitute a disguised restriction on international trade.

Exploring the Meaning of Trade-Restrictiveness in the WTO

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 451-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
TANIA VOON
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Alternative Measure ◽  
Precise Meaning ◽  
The World ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Domestic Products

AbstractTrade-restrictiveness is a familiar concept across various provisions and agreements of the World Trade Organization (WTO), but its precise meaning remains vague. In many WTO disputes, the existence or degree of trade-restrictiveness of a challenged measure is simply assumed or addressed in a few brief sentences. Yet whether a measure is more trade-restrictive than necessary, or more trade-restrictive than a proposed alternative measure, is crucial to the legality of a range of measures currently in place around the world, some under challenge in the WTO. A careful analysis of the existing case law and treaty text – focusing on Article 2.2 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade and the general exceptions in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the General Agreement on Trade in Services – demonstrates that while the existence of discrimination is likely to restrict trade, discrimination is not necessary to establish trade-restrictiveness, which also necessarily arises from direct barriers to market access such as import bans. In the absence of an explicit barrier to imports, a WTO panel is likely to focus on the extent to which a challenged measure negatively affects the competitive opportunities of imported products vis-à-vis domestic products.

scholarly journals The Trade Law Consequences of “Brexit”

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 795-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo R. Vergano ◽  
Tobias Dolle
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Gatt 1994 ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

AbstractThis section highlights the interface between international trade and investment law and municipal and international risk regulation. It is meant to cover cases and other legal developments in WTO law (SPS, TBT and TRIPS Agreements and the general exceptions in both GATT 1994 and GATS), bilateral investment treaty arbitration and other free trade agreements such as NAFTA. Pertinent developments in international standardization bodies recognized by the SPS and TBT Agreement are also covered.

Exploring the Confines of International Investment and Domestic Health Protections—Is a General Exceptions Clause a Forced Perspective?

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 332-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Chaisse
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
National Court ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
International Economic Law ◽  
State Liability ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

The international law of foreign investment is one of the fastest-growing areas of international economic law with several bilateral investment treaties or preferential trade agreements, including an investment chapter, negotiated every year. At the same time, new cases are being lodged at an exponential rate. Thanks to the remarkable effectiveness of its law, the investment regime has become a center of attraction not only for the settlement of disputes strictly related to investment but also problems between governments concerning matters including those of non-economic dimensions. The nature of the international arbitral process is entirely different from a national court process; it is an international tribunal governed by an international convention, mandated to inquire into the conduct and responsibility of a State in light of its treaty and customary international law obligations. This could result in significant State liability and could impact regulatory regimes and policy goals, attracting considerable criticism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document