IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenging Trips-Plus Agreements: The Potential Utility of Non-Violation Disputes


  • Susy Frankel


A World Trade Organization (WTO) non-violation complaint is one where an agreement has not been breached, but the complainant alleges an expected benefit under the agreement has been abrogated. When the TRIPS Agreement came into force non-violation complaints were not available for TRIPS disputes. This position was to be reviewed. Non-violation complaints remain unavailable for TRIPS disputes. In the early days of TRIPS the exclusion of non-violation disputes seemed rational because of the unique nature of TRIPS, among WTO agreements. The TRIPS Agreement requires members to implement minimum standards of intellectual property protection in their national laws. Members therefore have to provide at least that level of protection. If they do not do so a violation complaint could be initiated. Consequently, it was not logical to look for any notion of expected benefit beyond the wording of the minimum standards. However, TRIPS permits members to have greater standards and many members have agreed to higher standards through free trade agreements. These TRIPS-plus standards have arguably undermined expected benefits that should flow from TRIPS, especially for users of intellectual property rights. This article discusses the utility of making non-violation disputes available for TRIPS disputes from the perspectives of both the users and owners of intellectual property rights. This analysis includes a discussion of whether TRIPS-plus free trade agreements undermine expected benefits of the TRIPS Agreement and should thus be the subject of a non-violation dispute. Oxford University Press 2009, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Susy Frankel, 2009. "Challenging Trips-Plus Agreements: The Potential Utility of Non-Violation Disputes," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 1023-1065, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:12:y:2009:i:4:p:1023-1065

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Wendy Bonython & Bruce Baer Arnold, 2015. "Privacy, Personhood, and Property in the Age of Genomics," Laws, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(3), pages 1-36, July.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:oup:jieclw:v:12:y:2009:i:4:p:1023-1065. 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: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). 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.