Alternative Dispute Settlement and the Jurisprudential Legacy of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
George A. Papaconstantinou, Luigi F. Pedreschi
{"title":"Alternative Dispute Settlement and the Jurisprudential Legacy of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body","authors":"George A. Papaconstantinou, Luigi F. Pedreschi","doi":"10.54648/trad2022011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the possible impact of the disputes advanced through the Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (‘MPIA’) and preferential trade agreements (‘PTAs’) on the jurisprudential legacy of the Appellate Body (‘AB’) and shows that those alternative dispute settlement mechanisms can play a significant role in preserving and further developing World Trade Organization’s (‘WTO’) case law. In the future, the importance of alternative dispute settlement mechanisms resolving arguments of international trade law is bound to increase (especially, in light of the ongoing deadlock at the WTO). That said, this does not come without risks for the (much disputed) coherence of WTO precedence by way of departure from established interpretations of the WTO acquis. Ultimately, it is the quality of the alternative dispute settlement awards that will determine the extent to which the jurisprudential legacy of the AB will be maintained. This article demonstrates that alternative dispute settlement mechanisms pose both challenges and opportunities for the consistency of the WTO case law. This article sheds further light on the potential risks and virtues pertaining to each one of them and argues that until the functioning of the Appellate Body is restored, alternative dispute adjudicating bodies must observe its jurisprudential legacy to promote legal certainty and predictability in international trade dispute settlement.\nWTO Dispute Settlement, Alternative Dispute Settlement, Appellate Body, Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement, Preferential Trade Agreements","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyses the possible impact of the disputes advanced through the Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (‘MPIA’) and preferential trade agreements (‘PTAs’) on the jurisprudential legacy of the Appellate Body (‘AB’) and shows that those alternative dispute settlement mechanisms can play a significant role in preserving and further developing World Trade Organization’s (‘WTO’) case law. In the future, the importance of alternative dispute settlement mechanisms resolving arguments of international trade law is bound to increase (especially, in light of the ongoing deadlock at the WTO). That said, this does not come without risks for the (much disputed) coherence of WTO precedence by way of departure from established interpretations of the WTO acquis. Ultimately, it is the quality of the alternative dispute settlement awards that will determine the extent to which the jurisprudential legacy of the AB will be maintained. This article demonstrates that alternative dispute settlement mechanisms pose both challenges and opportunities for the consistency of the WTO case law. This article sheds further light on the potential risks and virtues pertaining to each one of them and argues that until the functioning of the Appellate Body is restored, alternative dispute adjudicating bodies must observe its jurisprudential legacy to promote legal certainty and predictability in international trade dispute settlement. WTO Dispute Settlement, Alternative Dispute Settlement, Appellate Body, Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement, Preferential Trade Agreements
替代性争端解决和世界贸易组织上诉机构的法理遗产
本文分析了多方临时上诉仲裁安排(“MPIA”)和优惠贸易协定(“pta”)对上诉机构(“AB”)的法理遗产可能产生的影响,并表明这些替代性争端解决机制可以在维护和进一步发展世界贸易组织(“WTO”)判例法方面发挥重要作用。在未来,解决国际贸易法争端的替代性争端解决机制的重要性必然会增加(特别是考虑到世贸组织目前的僵局)。话虽如此,由于偏离了对WTO判例的既定解释,这对WTO优先权的一致性(颇有争议)并非没有风险。最终,替代性争端解决裁决的质量将决定仲裁机构的法理遗产将在多大程度上得到保留。本文论证了替代性争端解决机制对WTO判例法一致性的挑战与机遇并存。本文进一步阐明了与上诉机构各自相关的潜在风险和优点,并认为在上诉机构恢复运作之前,替代性争端裁决机构必须遵守其法律遗产,以促进国际贸易争端解决中的法律确定性和可预测性。WTO争端解决,替代性争端解决,上诉机构,多方临时上诉仲裁安排,优惠贸易协定
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信