Dispute settlement

The WTO dispute settlement system plays an important role in clarifying and enforcing the legal obligations contained in the WTO Agreement. It has gained a strong practical relevance as more than 300 disputes have been brought from 1 January 1995 through October 2003. While dispute settlement is certainly not the only activity taking place within the WTO it has become an important part of the practical reality of the Organization. WTO dispute settlement has also become an important tool in the management by WTO Members of their international economic relations at large.

Before entering the subject matter a terminological specification is necessary. By ‘lawyers’ one can refer both to advocates and more generally to ‘jurists’. In this chapter I will refer to lawyers as advocates in their capacity as representatives of parties in proceedings before the WTO dispute settlement organs (the panels and the Appellate Body). I will also focus on their role as legal advisers to interested private parties; these are first of all enterprises de facto involved and directly affected by the outcome of these proceedings. Other private parties have also to be considered such as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) when they have an interest of a general nature in the result of a given case in the light of the interest they pursue.

The European Union succeeded the European Community for WTO purposes as of 1 December 2009.

This chapter will explain the conditions under which Members of the WTO can invoke the provisions of the dispute settlement system; that is what constitutes a valid basis for a complaint by one Member against another Member.

This updated edition of WTO Dispute Settlement: One-Page Case Summaries has been prepared by the Legal Affairs Division of the WTO with assistance from the Rules Division and the Appellate Body Secretariat. This new edition covers all panel and Appellate Body reports adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body as of 31 December 2012.

In the interest of accuracy this publication uses the historical names of GATT contracting parties as they were used at the time of each dispute e.g. Ceylon Czechoslovakia Hong Kong the Federal Republic of Germany Yugoslavia or the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. Likewise this publication makes reference to EEC-6 EEC-9 EEC-10 or EEC-12 to reflect different stages of enlargement of the European Economic Communities. It also refers to individual EEC member States (e.g. France Italy etc.) for cases when these countries acted in their own capacity.

The WTO dispute settlement system is a rules-based system as opposed to a negotiation-conciliation-mediation type of dispute resolution mechanism. The system includes procedural steps that can be triggered by any WTO Member dissatisfied with another Member’s measure considered to be inconsistent with any provision of the WTO Agreement. The system allows the dissatisfied Member to obtain a legal ruling by an independent adjudicative body on its rights and obligations under the relevant agreements. The dispute settlement system of the WTO is thus quasi-judicial: independent and autonomous bodies are responsible for adjudication of disputes although formally subject to the overall authority of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). The jurisdiction of the DSB and therefore that of the adjudicating bodies (i.e. panels and the Appellate Body) operating under its authority has been accepted by all WTO Members through their ratification of the WTO treaty. Thus a WTO Member cannot refuse to participate in a WTO dispute settlement procedure if a complaint is brought against it.