The DSU Interim Review--Need for its Elimination or Extension to the Appellate Body Stage?
AbstractOne innovation submitted for the review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) has been to extend the interim review to the appeal procedure before the Appellate Body. The proposal seeks to enhance Members control over the outcome of the dispute settlement proceeding. In contrast, numerous commentators have argued for the elimination of the interim review from the DSU by questioning its utility and giving preference to time savings for the proceedings. The merits of both proposals, elimination or extension, should be evaluated on the basis of the interim review's contribution to the effective resolution of disputes between parties. Based on past experience, this article evaluates the interim review's role to reach a mutually agreed solution (MAS) and to provide parties the opportunity to introduce new evidence, raise new legal arguments or request clarifications and corrections. To that effect, it examines the scope of the interim review as interpreted by the adjudicative bodies of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and identifies the limitations on the scope of Member's control during the interim review. The article concludes that an extension to the appeal stage would be of limited utility and potentially even incompatible with essential prerequisites of a legalistic procedure. As regards the panel stage, parties' rights would not be prejudiced by the removal of the interim review from the proceedings. Oxford University Press 2009, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Journal of International Economic Law.
Volume (Year): 12 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.jiel.oupjournals.org/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.