IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v22y2019i3p297-321..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

WTO Dispute Settlement Post 2019: What to Expect?

Author

Listed:
  • Joost Pauwelyn

Abstract

What does the imminent demise of the WTO Appellate Body (AB) mean for the settlement of ongoing and future trade disputes? This editorial discusses two ‘unlikely solutions’, at least in the short term: the US lifts its veto on AB appointments; a WTO organ unlocks the impasse. Appeals pending on 10 December 2019 will most likely be carried-over pursuant to (contested) Rule 15 of the AB Working Procedures. For panel reports released after that date, four main scenarios emerge: (i) appeals ‘into the void’ blocking the panel report, (ii) no appeal ex post, or ex ante no appeal pacts, (iii) Article 25 appeal arbitration, (iv) ‘floating’ panel reports (interim or final), neither adopted, nor appealed/blocked. The transformation from GATT to WTO took half a century. Regular veto rights in the settlement of trade disputes may be back in a matter of months. It is one thing to lose the AB, quite another to return to pre-WTO dispute settlement where panel outcomes are not automatically binding and power relations play a considerably greater role. At the same time, it would be wrong to equate a (temporary?) return to GATT-style dispute settlement with the collapse of a rules-based WTO system.

Suggested Citation

  • Joost Pauwelyn, 2019. "WTO Dispute Settlement Post 2019: What to Expect?," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 297-321.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:22:y:2019:i:3:p:297-321.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgz024
    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

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wolfgang Weiß, 2023. "The EU's strategic autonomy in times of politicisation of international trade: The future of commission accountability," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(S3), pages 54-64, July.
    2. Johann Robert Basedow, 2022. "Why de‐judicialize? Explaining state preferences on judicialization in World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body and Investor‐to‐State Dispute Settlement reforms," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1362-1381, October.
    3. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Herrmann, Christoph, 2020. "Trade conflicts with side effects: Compensation for innocent bystanders when imposing punitive tariffs," Studien, Stiftung Familienunternehmen / Foundation for Family Businesses, number 250008, June.
    4. Ian M. Sheldon, 2022. "The United States' power‐based bargaining and the WTO: Has anything really been gained?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 1424-1439, September.

    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:oup:jieclw:v:22:y:2019:i:3:p:297-321.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.