Dispute Settlement at the WTO
Syllabus
2006 Spring Semester Prof. Joongi Kim 김준기
Graduate School of Int`l Studies Office: New Millenium Hall 606
Yonsei University Tel: x 4181
Email: kimjg@yonsei.ac.kr Webpage: web.yonsei.ac.kr/jgk
Class Hours: Wed 9 – 11:50
Office Hours: Mon & Tues after 4 p.m. (email or call to confirm).
Course Description:
This seminar course will examine the strengths and weaknesses of the
dispute resolution mechanisms that govern international trade, primarily focusing on
the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) of the World Trade Organization. An
integral element of the course will be simulated dispute settlement exercises in which
students assume the role of trade representatives or dispute settlement panelists
and brief, debate and decide hypothetical cases based on actual litigated cases at
the GATT/WTO. With the continuing integration of the global economy, dispute
resolution mechanisms are playing an increasingly important role in the interpretation
and application of international trade agreements. Whether it be the Banana Case,
the Turtle/Shrimp case, the Section 301 case, or the Foreign Sales Corporations
Case, panel decisions are often at the center of the most complex trade issues in our
global market.
Grading will be based on class participation and the briefs, arguments and
decisions completed by students. For each class, several pre-designated
individuals will be also required to provide an in-depth elaboration of the subject
matter. While helpful, prerequisite law courses are not required.
Textbook, Class Material and References:
Decisions by the WTO panel and Appellate Body reports
Select articles and case study materials on current legal issues (mostly available
on the homepage)
Dispute Settlement Understanding (http://www.wto.org)
www.worldtradelaw.net
Class Schedule:
Week 1 Overview and Introduction (3/8)
Assignment of Simulated Dispute Resolution Exercises and "designated hitters"
Week 2 Operation of the WTO Dispute Settlement Process (3/15)
Leitner & Lester, “WTO Dispute Settlement 1995-2003,” 7 Journal of Int’l
Economic Law 169 (2004); Hudec, "The New WTO Dispute Settlement
Procedure," 8 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 1 (1999); Parlin, "Operation of
Consultations, Deterrence and Mediation," 31 Law & Policy Int'l Business (LPIB)
565; Horlick & Butterton, 31 LPIB 575; Wethington, 31 LPIB 583.
Week 3 Operation of Panels (3/22)
Stewart & Karpel, "Operation of Panels," 31 LPIB 593 (2000);
Korea - Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef, DS161/169
(2001) [Agri; NT; XX]
Week 4 Operation of Panels (3/29)
Ragosta, “Unmasking the WTO System,” 31 LPIB 739 (2000); Shirzad, 31 LPIB
769; Wallach, 31 LPIB 773; Ragosta, Shirzad, Wallach, Wilson, 31 LPIB 783
EC-Asbestos, DS135 (2001)[TBT, NT, XX]
Week 5 Dispute Settlement Understanding (4/5)
Davey, “The Case for A WTO Permanent Body,” 6 Journal of Int’l Economic Law
177 (2003); Shoyer, “Panel Selection in WTO,” ” 6 Journal of Int’l Economic Law
203 (2003)
Argentina-Bovine Hides, DS155 (2001)[XI, III, XX]
Week 6 Appellate Process (4/12)
Ehlermann, “Reflections on the Appellate Body of the WTO,” 6 Journal of Int’l
Economic Law 695 (2003); McRae, “Comments on Ehlermann,” 6 Journal of Int’l
Economic Law 709 (2003)
Japan-Apples, DS245 (2003)[SPS]
Week 7 Implementation Process (4/19)
Complainant and Respondents receive briefs (Module 1)
Vazquez & Jackson, “Some Reflections on Compliance,” 33 Law & Policy in Int’l
Business 555 (2002); Pauwelyn, “Enforcement and Countermeasures in the
WTO,” 94 American Journal of Int’l Law 335 (2000)
US-AD Act of 1916, DS136 (2004)[22.6], Argentina-Safeguard, DS238 (2003)
Week 8 WTO System (4/26)
Complainant and Respondents submit briefs (Module 1)(4/29 7 pm)
McRae, “What is the Future of WTO Dispute Settlement,” 7 Journal of Int’l Law 3
(2004)
EC-Tariff Preferences, DS246 (2004)[Dev]
Week 9 Oral Arguments (5/3)
Oral Arguments Before Panel (Module 1)
Week 10 Midterm (5/10)
Panel issues and presents decision (Module 1)(5/13 7 pm)
Week 11 Safeguards (5/17)
Greenwald, “WTO Dispute Settlement,” Journal of Int’l Economic Law (2002);
US – Definitive Safeguard Measures On Imports Of Certain Steel Products DS248
(2003)
Week 12 Subsidies (5/24)
Complainant and Respondents receive problem set (Module 2)
Cunningham & Cribb “Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of ‘Free Flow of
Trade,’” Journal of Int’l Economic Law (2003)
US-Canada Softwood Lumber DS257 (2004)
Week 13 Antidumping (5/31)
Complainants and Respondents submit briefs (Module 2 due 6/3 7:00)
Cunningham & Cribb “Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of ‘Free Flow of
Trade,’” Journal of Int’l Economic Law (2003)
EC–Brazil Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe ittings DS219 (2003)
Week 14 Issues of Panel Jurisdiction (6/7)
Oral Arguments Before Panel (Module 2)
Canada-Wheat and Grain DS276 (2004)
Week 15 Final (6/14)
Panel issues and presents decision (Module 2 due 6/17 7:00)