News 24 Jun. 2021
Curtis successfully defends foreign states' procedural privileges in the UK Supreme Court
News 23 Jun. 2021
Ibrahim Elsadig joins Curtis as Partner in Dubai
Client Alert 24 Feb. 2022
EU, UK, Japan and Australia Impose Sanctions on Russia
News 09 Aug. 2021
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle enters into association with Chevalier Law in Singapore.
News 06 May. 2022
Curtis Advises Terna Group on the Sale of its Latin America Power Transmission Assets to CDPQ
Publications 05 May. 2022
Marie-Claire Argac, Simon Batifort, and Cyprien Mathié share highlights from “Affaires d’Etats: Practical Considerations When Defending States in International Arbitration” on Kluwer Arbitration Blog
Event 26 Apr. 2022
Claudia Frutos-Peterson Speaks at CAI Costa Rica’s 13th Congress of International Arbitration
News 21 Apr. 2022
SCOTUS Upholds U.S. Colonialism under the U.S. Constitution
Client Alert 23 Mar. 2022
The Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) has launched the DIAC Arbitration Rules 2022
Event 22 Nov. 2021
Partner Antonia Birt spoke at ADGMAC and AIAC Webinar Series: Webinar 5 - Disputes in Fintech and Complex Technology in MESEA
News 19 May. 2022
Eliot Lauer’s and Juan Perla’s Tenth Circuit Arguments Featured on Audio Arguendo Podcast
News 16 May. 2022
Curtis Files SCOTUS Amicus Brief for Ohio Justice & Policy Center in Prisoners’ Rights Case
Client Alert 21 Apr. 2022
New Laws Targeting Assets of Russian Oligarchs: The U.S. Announces Task Force KleptoCapture and the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Rewards Program
Client Alert 19 Apr. 2022
U.S. President Biden Expands Export Controls Imposed on Russia and Belarus
Client Alert 24 Jun. 2021
Update on Virtual Notarization (Executive Order 202.7) During the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic (Updated: June 24, 2021) — U.S. Insight
Update on Virtual Witnessing (New York Executive Order 202.14) During The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic (Updated: June 24, 2021) — U.S. Insight
The World Trade Organization settles international trade disputes with a multi-step process outlined in the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) agreed to by member nations in 1994. The process includes various stages of consultation between the member nations, the formation of an ad hoc Dispute Settlement Panel, examination of the member nations and third parties by the panel, the issuance of a report, and, if necessary, authorized compensatory or retaliatory measures.
Insofar as the purpose of WTO trade law is to preserve the rights of WTO member nations and to provide predictability and uniformity to the resolution of WTO trade disputes, the dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade Organization could reasonably be said to serve its purpose. Of course, there are examples of disputes between member nations that have not been satisfactorily resolved by the WTO.
WTO decisions are enforced by consensus. The WTO itself holds no leverage over the member nations and relies on its members to enforce sanctions, retaliatory measures, and compensatory measures. Unlike some agencies, whose bureaucracies can threaten to withhold credit to an offending nation, WTO trade law is entirely consensus-based.
The World Trade Organization hears allegations of violations of its trade agreements via its Dispute Settlement Body. Decisions of and reports by the DSB must be enforced by member nations, who have previously agreed to the DIspute Settlement Understanding which requires a multilateral approach to dispute resolution. The WTO has no authority or leverage to unilaterally impose resolutions of international trade disputes.
The WTO dispute process begins with a consultation period, during which the affected member nations engage in negotiation and mediation. If consultation is unsuccessful, each party is examined by an ad hoc dispute resolution panel made up of three or five members. The panel prepares a report and provides it to the involved parties. The unsuccessful party submits an implementation report to the panel. If implementation is unsatisfactory, the successful party may be authorized to take retaliatory measures.
A trade dispute can refer to a wide variety of situations, from a full-scale “customs war” or “trade war” to a less intense conflict about the alleged violation of a trade agreement, custom, or rule by one of a country’s trading partners. International trade disputes often involve allegations of dumping or abusive national subsidy practices.
The dispute settlement mechanism is a crucial part of WTO trade law. When an international trade dispute occurs, the World Trade Organization encourages consultation between the affected parties to resolve the dispute. When no resolution is forthcoming, the World Trade Organization convenes an ad hoc dispute settlement panel to examine each of the parties and any involved third parties. The panel prepares a report, the recommendations of which must be implemented by the unsuccessful party.
Trade disputes can be handled in a variety of ways. The majority are dealt with by way of informal and formal negotiations between nations. Those that require further adjudication often go before the Dispute Settlements Body at the World Trade Organization. International trade disputes that require this level of formal resolution move through different levels of consultation, litigation, and adjudication.
WTO and International Trade Dispute Settlement
+1 202 452 7373
+86 10 8564 6200
+41 22 718 3500
Client Alert 29 Apr. 2020
U.S. Insight: Effects of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) in International Trade Proceedings
News 20 Feb. 2020
18 Curtis Practice Areas and 22 Individuals Ranked in Chambers Global 2020