IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v9y2010i01p7-57_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commentary on the Appellate Body Report in EC–Bananas III (Article 21.5): waiver-thin, or lock, stock, and metric ton?

Author

Listed:
  • SCHROPP, SIMON A. B.
  • PALMETER, DAVID

Abstract

At first glance, the Appellate Body Report in Bananas III (Article 21.5; Second Recourse) does not seem to be a case for the Guinness Book. The AB upheld most of the Panel's findings, and the EC lost big. This was hardly surprising, given that the contested measure only marginally differed from the measure at issue in the first recourse to a compliance Panel. It is at second sight that this AB Report reveals its interesting facets. We highlight a few remarkable legal and economics aspects, some of a more systemic nature, some offering practical insights: For practitioners, the role of estoppel in WTO litigation, the legal effect of Panel suggestions, and the relevance of Uruguay Round Modalities Papers as interpretative tools may be of interest. Readers more concerned with systemic aspects of the WTO may take interest in the economics of tariff quotas, the inherently discriminatory nature of tariff-quota allocation in the WTO, and the relevance of compliance proceedings for the damage calculation under Article 22.6 of the DSU.

Suggested Citation

  • Schropp, Simon A. B. & Palmeter, David, 2010. "Commentary on the Appellate Body Report in EC–Bananas III (Article 21.5): waiver-thin, or lock, stock, and metric ton?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 7-57, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:9:y:2010:i:01:p:7-57_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S147474560999019X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:9:y:2010:i:01:p:7-57_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.