IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chronique de jurisprudence. Chronique commentée du règlement des différends de l'omc (début juillet 2008 à début juillet 2009)


  • Walid Abdelgawad
  • Clotilde Jourdain-Fortier
  • Isabelle Moine-Dupuis


Umpteenth and ultimate ( ?) decision in the Hormones case : the Appellate Body refuses to put an end to retaliatory measures practiced by USA and Canada against EC, which, on grounds of the protection of public health, continue to refuse access to their market for meat and meat products from cattle treated with specific hormones. Nevertheless, the preceding Panel report, which resulted in an identical conclusion, is revised on numerous points by the Appellate Body (in particular as regards the question of scientific assessment, and as regards the precautionary principle), thus demonstrating more comprehension for non-market considerations. Following the Panel’s report in the China automobile parts case, the Appellate Body again condemns China for having granted, by its customs system, a preferential treatment of domestic parts as compared to imported parts, namely the assimilation of kits of automobile parts to complete vehicles, which resulted in their being more heavily taxed than Chinese parts. This is the first condemnation of China by the Dispute Settlement Body. A second condemnation followed shortly after China’s accession to WTO. It concerned China’s role as a main territory for activities of counterfeiting, more particularly its failure to grant protection for the rights of authors of works whose distribution China refuses to authorize. In addition, China is also in part condemned for its legislation, which does not, as a matter of sanctioning IPR infringements, provide for the withdrawal from commerce of infringing goods.

Suggested Citation

  • Walid Abdelgawad & Clotilde Jourdain-Fortier & Isabelle Moine-Dupuis, 2009. "Chronique de jurisprudence. Chronique commentée du règlement des différends de l'omc (début juillet 2008 à début juillet 2009)," Revue internationale de droit économique, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 465-502.
  • Handle: RePEc:cai:riddbu:ride_234_0465

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: free

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: free


    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:cai:riddbu:ride_234_0465. See general 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: (Jean-Baptiste de Vathaire). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.