National law in WTO law: Effectiveness and good governance in the world trading system

National Law in WTO Law: Effectiveness and Good Governance in the World Trading System

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1-316

  Bhuiyan, Sharif ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926156430     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511674525     Document Type: Book

References (400)

1. Abbott, R. (1993), “GATT and the Trade Policy Review Mechanism: Further Reflections on Earlier Reflections,” 27(3) JWT 117.
2. Abi-Saab, G. (2005), “The WTO Dispute Settlement and General International Law,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 7.
3. Akakwam, P. A. (1996), “The Standard of Review in the 1994 Antidumping Code: Circumscribing the Role of GATT Panels in Reviewing National Antidumping Determinations,” 5 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 277.
4. Alston, P. (2002), “Resisting the Merger and Acquisition of Human Rights by Trade Law: A Reply to Petersmann,” 13 EJIL 815.
5. Alvarez, J. E. (1996), “Judging the Security Council,” 90 AJIL 1. (2002), “The WTO as Linkage Machine,” 96 AJIL 146.
6. Amerasinghe, C. F. (2004), Local Remedies in International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
7. Anderson, K. (2002), “Peculiarities of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement,” 1 World Trade Review 123.
8. Applebaum, H. M. & Schlitt, L. M. (1995), The GATT, the WTO and the Uruguay Round Agreements Act: Understanding the Fundamental Changes (New York: Practising Law Institute).
9. Appleton, A. E. (1999), “Shrimp/Turtle: Untangling the Nets,” 2(3) JIEL 477.
10. Arai-Takahashi, Y. (2002), The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR (Antwerp, Oxford, New York: Intersentia).
11. Aust, A. (2000), Modern Treaty Law and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
12. Bacchus, J. (2002), “Table Talk: Around the Table of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization,” 35(4) Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1021.
13. Bacchus, J. (2003), “The Appeals of Trade: The Making of an Old GATT Hand,” address by James Bacchus, Chairman, Appellate Body, World Trade Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, to the International Trade Law Conference of the American Bar Association, Georgetown University Law School, Washington, DC (January 31).
14. Bacchus, J. (2004), “A Few Thoughts on Legitimacy, Democracy, and the WTO,” 7(3) JIEL 667.
15. Barfield, C. E. (2001), Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy: The Future of the World Trade Organization (Washington: AEI Press).
16. Bartels, L. (2001), “Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings,” 35(3) JWT 499.
17. Bartels, L. (2005), “The Appellate Body Report in European Communities -- Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries and its Implications for Conditionality in GSP Programmes,” in T. Cottier, J. Pauwelyn & E. B¨urgi Bonanomi (eds.), Human Rights and International Trade (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 463.
18. Beckett, W. E. (1934), “The Question of Classification (‘Qualification’) in Private International Law,” 15 BYIL 46.
19. Becroft, R. (2006), “The Standard of Review Strikes Back: The US -- Korea DRAMS Appeal,” 9(1) JIEL 207.
20. Bedjaoui, M. (2000), “Expediency in the Decisions of the International Court of Justice,” 71 BYIL 1.
21. Bello, J. H. (1996), “The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding: Less Is More,” 90 AJIL 416.
22. Bernhardt, R. (1993), “The Convention and Domestic Law,” in R. St. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher & H. Petzold (eds.), The European System for the Protection of Human Rights (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers) 25.
23. Bethlehem, D. (1998), “International Law, European Community Law, National Law: Three Systems in Search of a Framework,” in M. Koskenniemi (ed.), International Law Aspects of the European Union (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 169.
24. Bethlehem, D. (2000), “Submissions on Points of Fact and Law: Written and Oral Pleadings Before the International Court of Justice,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May) 175.
25. Beviglia Zampetti, A. (2003), “Democratic Legitimacy in the World Trade Organization: The Justice Dimension,” 37(1) JWT105.
26. Bhagwati, J. (2002), “The Question of Linkage,” 96 AJIL 126.
27. Bhagwati, J. (2004), In Defense of Globalization (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
28. Bhagwati, J. & Patrick, H. T. (1991), Aggressive Unilateralism: America’s 301 Trade Policy and the World Trading System (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf).
29. Bhala, R. (1999a), “The Myth about Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy),” 14 American University International Law Review 845.
30. Bhala, R. (1999b), “The Precedent Setters: De Facto Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Two of a Trilogy),” 9 Florida State University Journal of Transnational Law and Policy 1.
31. Bhala, R. (2001), “The Power of the Past: Towards De Jure Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Three of a Trilogy),” 33 George Washington International Law Review 873.
32. Bhuiyan, S. (2002), “Mandatory and Discretionary Legislation: The Continued Relevance of the Distinction under the WTO,” 5(3) JIEL 571.
33. Bhuiyan, S. (2004), “Unreal Federal Clauses of the World Trade Organization Treaty: A Case for Removing the ‘Apparent’ Limitations on Implementation and Observance of World Trade Organization Commitments at Sub-national Levels,” 38(1) JWT 123.
34. Bierman, L., Fraser, D. R. & Kolari, J. W. (1996), “The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: World Trade from a Market Perspective,” 17 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 821.
35. Blackhurst, R. (1991), “Strengthening GATT Surveillance of Trade-Related Policies,” in E.-U. Petersmann & M. Hilf (eds.), The New GATT Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Legal and Economic Problems (2nd edn.; Deventer, Boston: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers) 123.
36. Bloche, M. G. (2002), “WTO Deference to National Health Policy: Toward an Interpretive Principle,” 5(4) JIEL 825.
37. Bourgeois, J. H. J. (1998), “WTO Dispute Settlement in the Field of Anti-Dumping Law,” 1(2) JIEL 259.
38. Bourgeois, J. H. J. (2000a), “The European Court of Justice and the WTO: Problems and Challenges,” in J. H. H. Weiler (ed.), The EU, the WTO, and the NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade? (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 71.
39. Bourgeois, J. H. J. (2000b), “‘Subsidiarity’ in the WTO Context from a Legal Perspective,” in M. Bronckers, & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 35.
40. Bridge, J. (1984), “Procedural Aspects of the Enforcement of European Community Law through the Legal Systems of the Member States,” 9 European Law Review 28.
41. Bronckers, M. & McNelis, N. (2000), “Fact and Law in Pleadings Before the WTO Appellate Body,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May) 321.
42. Bronckers, M. & Quick, R. (2000), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
43. Brownlie, I. (1998), Principles of Public International Law (5th edn.; Oxford: Oxford University Press).
44. Cameron, J. & Campbell, K. (1998), Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organisation (London: Cameron May).
45. Cameron, J. & Gray, K. R. (2001), “Principles of International Law in the WTO Dispute Settlement Body,” 50 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 248.
46. Cameron, J. & Orava, S. J. (2000), “GATT/WTO Panels Between Recording and Finding Facts: Issues of Due Process, Evidence, Burden of Proof, and Standard of Review in GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May) 195.
47. Cannizzaro, E. (2001), “The Role of Proportionality in the Law of International Countermeasures,” 12 EJIL 889.
48. Carmody, C. (2002), “Remedies and Conformity under the WTO Agreement,” 5(2) JIEL 307.
49. Carozza, P. G. (2003), “Subsidiarity as a Structural Principle of International Human Rights Law,” 97 AJIL 38.
50. Cass, D. Z. (2001), “The ‘Constitutionalization’ of International Trade Law: Judicial Norm-Generation as the Engine of Constitutional Development in International Trade,” 12(1) EJIL 39.
51. Cass, D. Z. (2005), The Constitutionalization of the World Trade Organization: Legitimacy, Democracy, and Community in the International Trading System (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
52. Cassese, A. (2001), International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
53. Charnovitz, S. (2001), “Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions,” 95 AJIL 792.
54. Chayes, A. & Chayes, A. H. (1995), The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
55. Cheng, B. (1987), General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals [1953] (reprinted, Cambridge: Grotius Publications Limited).
56. Cho, S.-J. (1998), “GATT Non-Violation Issues in the WTO Framework: Are They the Achilles’ Heel of the Dispute Settlement Process?” 39 Harvard International Law Journal 311.
57. Cho, S.-J. (2004), “A Bridge Too Far: The Fall of the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference in Canc´un and the Future of Trade Constitution,” 7(2) JIEL 219.
58. Christoforou, T. (2000), “WTO Panels in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May) 243.
59. Clarkson, C. M. V. & Hill, J. (1997), Jaffey on the Conflict of Laws (London, Edinburgh, Dublin: Butterworths).
60. Clayton, R. & Tomlinson, H. (2000), The Law of Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
61. Collier, J. & Lowe, V. (1999), The Settlement of Disputes in International Law: Institutions and Procedures (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
62. Collins, L. (2000), Dicey and Morris on the Conflict of Laws (13th edn.; London: Sweet & Maxwell).
63. Cottier, T. & Schefer, K. N. (1997), “Non-Violation Complaints in WTO/GATT Dispute Settlement: Past, Present and Future,” in E.-U. Petersmann (ed.), International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 143.
64. Cottier, T. & Schefer, K. N. (1998), “The Relationship Between World Trade Organization Law, National and Regional Law,” 1(1) JIEL 83.
65. Cottier, T., Pauwelyn, J. & B¨urgi Bonanomi, E. (2005), Human Rights and International Trade (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
66. Craig, P. (2001), “Constitutions, Constitutionalism, and the European Union,” 7(2) European Law Journal 125.
67. Craig, P. & de B´urca, G. (1998), EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
68. Crawford, J. (2002), The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
69. Croley, S. P. & Jackson, J. H. (1996), “WTO Dispute Procedures, Standard of Review, and Deference to National Governments,” 90 AJIL 193.
70. Croome, J. (1999), Reshaping the World Trading System: A History of the Uruguay Round (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
71. Cunningham, R. O. & Cribb, T. H. (2003), “Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of ‘Free Flow of Trade’: A Review of WTO Dispute Settlement of US Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures,” 6(1) JIEL 155.
72. D’Angelo, D. (2000), “The ‘Check’ on International Peace and Security Maintenance: The International Court of Justice and Judicial Review of Security Council Resolutions,” 23 Suffolk Transnational Law Review 561.
73. Davey, W. J. (2001), “Has the WTO Dispute Settlement System Exceeded its Authority? A Consideration of Deference Shown by the System to Member Government Decisions and its Use of Issue-Avoidance Techniques,” 4(1) JIEL 79.
74. Davey, W. J. (2006), “The WTO: Looking Forwards,” 9(1) JIEL 3.
75. Davey, W. J. & Morrison, P. (1997), Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference on Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization (Geneva: WTO).
76. Davies, A. (2004), “Mandatory and Discretionary Legislation in WTO Law: A Distinction Worth Preserving?” 31(3) Legal Issues of Economic Integration 185.
77. De B´urca, G. & Scott, J. (2000), Constitutional Change in the EU: From Uniformity to Flexibility? (Oxford: Hart Publishing).
78. De B´urca, G. & Scott, J. (2001), The EU and the WTO: Legal and Constitutional Issues (Oxford: Hart Publishing).
79. Delaume, G. R. (1981), “State Contracts and Transnational Arbitration,” 75 AJIL 784.
80. Denza, E. (2003), “The Relationship Between International and National Law,” in M. D. Evans (ed.), International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 415.
81. Desmedt, A. (2001), “Proportionality in WTO Law,” 4(3) JIEL 441.
82. Desmedt, G. A. (1998), “Hormones: ‘Objective Assessment’ and (or as) Standard of Review,” 1(4) JIEL 695.
83. Dunoff, J. L. (1992), “Reconciling International Trade with Preservation of the Global Commons: Can We Prosper and Protect?” 49 Washington and Lee Law Review 1407.
84. Dunoff, J. L. (2006), “Constitutional Conceits: The WTO’s ‘Constitution’ and the Discipline of International Law,” 17(3) EJIL 647.
85. Durling, J. P. (2003), “Deference, But Only When Due: WTO Review of Anti-Dumping Measures,” 6(1) JIEL 125.
86. Durling, J. P. & Hardin, D. (2005), “Amicus Curiae Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement: Reflections on the Past Decade,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press) 221.
87. Eeckhout, P. (1997), “The Domestic Legal Status of the WTO Agreement: Interconnecting Legal Systems,” 34(1) Common Market Law Review 11.
88. Eeckhout, P. (2002), “Judicial Enforcement of WTO Law in the European Union: Some Further Reflections,” 5(1) JIEL 91.
89. Ehlermann, C.-D. (2002), “Six Years on the Bench of the ‘World Trade Court’: Some Personal Experiences as Member of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization,” 36(4) JWT 605.
90. Ehlermann, C.-D. (2003), “Reflections on the Appellate Body of the WTO,” 6(3) JIEL 695.
91. Ehlermann, C.-D. & Lockhart, N. (2004), “Standard of Review in WTO Law,” 7(3) JIEL 491.
92. Eisenmann, P. M. (1996), The Integration of International and European Community Law into the National Legal Order (Deventer: Kluwer Law International).
93. Eissen, M.-A. (1993), “The Principle of Proportionality in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights,” in R. St. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher & H. Petzold (eds.), The European System for the Protection of Human Rights (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers) 125.
94. Ellis, E. (1999), The Principle of Proportionality in the Laws of Europe (Oxford: Hart).
95. Emiliou, N. (1996), The Principle of Proportionality in European Law: A Comparative Study (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
96. Estella, A. (2002), The EU Principle of Subsidiarity and its Critique (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
97. Esty, D. C. (2002), “The World Trade Organization’s Legitimacy Crisis,” 1(1) World Trade Review 7.
98. Esty, D. C. (2002), (2006), “Good Governance at the Supranational Scale: Globalizing Administrative Law,” 115 Yale Law Journal 1490.
99. Fentiman, R. (1998), Foreign Law in English Courts: Pleading, Proof and Choice of Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
100. Finger, J. M. (2005), “The Future of the World Trade Organization: Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millennium -- A Review,” 39(4) JWT 795.
101. Fitzmaurice, G. (1957), “The General Principles of International Law Considered from the Standpoint of the Rule of Law,” 92 Recueil des Cours (II).
102. Fitzmaurice, G. (1959), “The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice, 1954-9: General Principles and Sources of International Law,” 35 BYIL 183.
103. Franck, T. M. (1975), “Word Made Law: The Decision of the ICJ in the Nuclear Test Cases,” 69 AJIL 612.
104. Franck, T. M. (1992), “The ‘Powers of Appreciation’: Who Is the Ultimate Guardian of UN Legality?” 86 AJIL 519.
105. Fukunaga, Y. (2006), “Securing Compliance through the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Implementation of DSB Recommendations,” 9(2) JIEL 383.
106. Gaja, G. (1992), “Positivism and Dualism in Dionisio Anzilotti,” 3(1) EJIL 123.
107. Gantz, D. A. (2000), “Government-to-Government Dispute Resolution under NAFTA’s Chapter 20: A Commentary on the Process,” 11 American Review of International Arbitration 481.
108. GAO (2003), World Trade Organization: Standard of Review and Impact of Trade Remedy Rulings (Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office, July), available at the GAO website, www.gao.gov.
109. Garcia-Rubio, M. (2001), On the Application of Customary Rules of State Responsibility by the WTO Dispute Settlement Organs: A General International Law Perspective (Geneva: Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales).
110. Gardam, J. G. (1993), “Proportionality and Force in International Law,” 87 AJIL 391.
111. Gathii, J. T. (2001), “Re-characterizing the Social in the Constitutionalization of the WTO: A Preliminary Analysis,” 7 Widener Law Symposium Journal 137.
112. Gerhart, P. M. (2003), “The Two Constitutional Visions of the World Trade Organization,” 24 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 1.
113. Goh, G. (2006), “Tipping the Apple Cart: The Limits of Science and Law in the SPS Agreement after Japan - Apples,” 40(4) JWT 655.
114. Goh, G. & Ziegler, A. R. (2003), “Retrospective Remedies in the WTO after Automotive Leather,” 6(3) JIEL 545.
115. Gomula, J. (1999), “The Standard of Review of Article 17.6 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and the Problem of Its Extension to other WTO Agreements,” in P. Mengozzi (ed.), International Trade Law on the 50th Anniversary of the Multilateral Trade System (Milan: Dott. A. Giuffre Editore) 577.
116. Gonzalez, J. P. (1995), “The Principle of Subsidiarity (A Guide for Lawyers with a Particular Community Orientation),” 20(4) European Law Review 355.
117. Gowlland-Debbas, V. (1994), “The Relationship Between the International Court of Justice and the Security Council in the Light of the Lockerbie Case,” 88 AJIL 643.
118. Grane, P. (2001), “Remedies under WTO Law,” 4(4) JIEL 755.
119. Gray, C. (1987), Judicial Remedies in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
120. Gray, C. (1996), “Bosnia and Herzegovina: Civil War or Inter-State Conflict? Characterization and Consequences,” 67 BYIL 155.
121. Gray, C. (2000), “Types of Remedies in ICJ Cases: Lessons for the WTO?” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May)401.
122. Greenwood, C. (1982), “State Contracts in International Law: The Libyan Oil Arbitrations,” 53 BYIL 27.
123. Griller, S. (2000), “Judicial Enforceability of WTO Law in the European Union,” 3(3) JIEL 441.
124. Guruswamy, L. D. (1998), “Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?” 7 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 287.
125. Habermas, J. (1984), The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, trans. T. McCarthy (Cambridge: Polity).
126. Habermas, J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. W. Rehg (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
127. Hansen, M. & Vermulst, E. (1989), “The GATT Protocol of Provisional Application: A Dying Grandfather?” 27(2) Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 263.
128. Hansen, P. I. (1999), “Transparency, Standards of Review, and the Use of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment,” 39 Virginia Journal of International Law 1017.
129. Harris, D. J. (1998), Cases and Materials on International Law (5th edn.; London: Sweet & Maxwell).
130. Harris, D. J., O’Boyle, M. & Warbrick, C. (1995), Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (London, Dublin, Edinburgh: Butterworths).
131. Helfer, L. R. (1999), “Forum Shopping for Human Rights,” 148 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 285.
132. Henkin, L. (1979), How Nations Behave: Law and Foreign Policy (New York: Columbia University Press).
133. Henkin, L. (1996), Foreign Affairs and the United States Constitution (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
134. Higgins, D. R. (2000), “Dualism in the Face of a Changing Legal Culture,” in M. Andenas & D. Fairgrieve (eds.), Judicial Review in International Perspective: Liber Amicorum in Honour of Lord Slynn of Hadley (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 9.
135. Hilf, M. (1997), “The Role of National Courts in International Trade Relations,” 18 Michigan Journal of International Law 321.
136. Hilf, M. (2001), “Power, Rules and Principles -- Which Orientation for WTO/GATTLaw?” 4(1) JIEL 111.
137. Hilf, M. & Petersmann, E.-U. (1993), National Constitutions and International Economic law (Deventer: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers).
138. Holmes, P. (2001), “The WTO and the EU: Some Constitutional Comparisons,” in G. de B´urca & J. Scott (eds.), The EU and the WTO: Legal and Constitutional Issues (Oxford: Hart Publishing) 59.
139. Horlick, G. N. (2002), “Problems with the Compliance Structure of the WTO Dispute Resolution Process,” in D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 636.
140. Horlick, G. N. & Clarke, P. A. (1997), “Standards for Panels Reviewing Anti-dumping Determinations under the GATT and WTO,” in E.-U. Petersmann (ed.), International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 313.
141. Horn, H. & Mavroidis, P. C. (2004), “Still Hazy after All These Years: The Interpretation of National Treatment in the GATT/WTO Case-law on Tax Discrimination,” 15(1) EJIL 39.
142. Howse, R. (2000), “Adjudicative Legitimacy and Treaty Interpretation in International Trade Law: The Early Years of WTO Jurisprudence,” in J. H. H. Weiler (ed.), The EU, the WTO and the NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade? (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 35.
143. Howse, R. & Nicolaidis, K. (2001), “Legitimacy and Global Governance: Why Constitutionalizing the WTO Is a Step Too Far,” in R. B. Porter, P. Sauv´e, A. Subramanian & A. Beviglia Zampetti (eds.), Efficiency, Equity, and Legitimacy: The Multilateral Trading System at the Millennium (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press) 227.
144. Howse, R. & Nicolaidis, K. (2003), “Legitimacy through ‘Higher Law’? Why Constitutionalizing the WTO Is a Step Too Far,” in T. Cottier & P. C. Mavroidis (eds.), The Role of the Judge in International Trade Regulation: Experience and Lessons for the WTO (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press) 307.
145. Hu, J. (2004), “The Role of International Law in the Development of WTO Law,” 7(1) JIEL 143.
146. Hudec, R. E. (1993), Enforcing International Trade Law: The Evolution of the Modern GATT Legal System (Salem, NH: Butterworth Legal Publishers).
147. Hudec, R. E. (1998), “GATT/WTO Constraints on National Regulation: Requiem for an ‘Aim and Effects’ Test,” 32 International Lawyer 619.
148. Hudec, R. E. (1999), Essays on the Nature of International Trade Law (London: Cameron May).
149. Hudec, R. E. (2000a), “Broadening the Scope of Remedies in WTO Dispute Settlement,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: CameronMay) 369.
150. Hudec, R. E. (2000b), “The Product--Process Doctrine in GATT/WTO Jurisprudence,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 187.
151. Hudec, R. E. (2003), “Industrial Subsidies: Tax Treatment of ‘Foreign Sales Corporations,’” in E.-U. Petersmann & M. A. Pollack (eds.), Transatlantic Economic Disputes: The EU, the US, and the WTO (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 175.
152. Hudec, R. E., Kennedy, D. L. M. & Sgarbossa, M. (1993), “A Statistical Profile of GATT Dispute Settlement Cases: 1948-1989,” 2 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 1 (1993).
153. Hughes, L. (1998), “Limiting the Jurisdiction of Dispute Settlement Panels: The WTO Appellate Body Beef Hormone Decision,” 10 Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 915.
154. Hughes, V. (2005), “Special Challenges at the Appellate Stage: A Case Study,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 80.
155. Hurst, D. R. (1998), “Hormones: European Communities -- Measures Affecting Meat and Meat Products,” 9(1) EJIL 182, text available at the EJIL website, www.ejil.org.
156. Iwasawa, Y. (2000), “WTO Dispute Settlement and Japan,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 473.
157. Iwasawa, Y. (2002), “WTO Dispute Settlement as Judicial Supervision,” 5(2) JIEL 287.
158. Jackson, J. H. (1969), World Trade and the Law of GATT (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill).
159. Jackson, J. H. (1978), “The Jurisprudence of International Trade: The DISC Case in GATT,” 72 AJIL 747.
160. Jackson, J. H. (1992), “Status of Treaties in Domestic Legal Systems: A Policy Analysis,” 86 AJIL 310.
161. Jackson, J. H. (1997a), The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (2nd edn.; Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press).
162. Jackson, J. H. (1997b), “The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding – Misunderstandings on the Nature of Legal Obligation,” 91 AJIL 60.
163. Jackson, J. H. (1997c), “The Great 1994 Sovereignty Debate: United States Acceptance and Implementation of the Uruguay Round Results,” 36 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 157.
164. Jackson, J. H. (1998), The World Trade Organization: Constitution and Jurisprudence (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs).
165. Jackson, J. H. (2001), “The WTO ‘Constitution’ and Proposed Reforms: Seven ‘Mantras’ Revisited,” 4(1) JIEL 67.
166. Jackson, J. H. (2002), “Sovereignty, Subsidiarity, and Separation of Powers: The High-Wire Balancing Act of Globalization,” in D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 13.
167. Jackson, J. H. (2003), “Sovereignty-Modern: A New Approach to an Outdated Concept,” 97 AJIL 782.
168. Jackson, J. H. (2004), “International Law Status of WTO Dispute Settlement Reports: Obligation to Comply or Option to ‘Buy Out’?” 98 AJIL 109.
169. Jackson, J. H. (2006), Sovereignty, the WTO and Changing Fundamentals of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
170. Jackson, J. H., Davey, W. J. & Sykes, A. O. (1995), Legal Problems of International Economic Relations (St. Paul, MN: West Group).
171. Jackson, J. H. & Sykes, A. O. (1997), Implementing the Uruguay Round (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
172. Jacobs, F. & Roberts, S. (1987), The Effects of Treaties in Domestic Law (London: Sweet & Maxwell).
173. Jenks, C. W. (1938), “The Interpretational and Application of Municipal Law by the Permanent Court of International Justice,” 19 BYIL 67.
174. Jenks, C. W. (1964), The Prospects of International Adjudication (London: Stevens & Sons Limited).
175. Jennings, R. (1961), “State Contracts in International Law,” 37 BYIL 156.
176. Jennings, R. & Watts, A. (1992), Oppenheim’s International Law, vol. I (9th edn.; Harlow: Longman).
177. Joergens, K. J. (1999), “True Appellate Procedure or Only a Two-Stage Process? A Comparative View of the Appellate Body under the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding,” 30 Law and Policy in International Business 193.
178. Joerges, C., Sand, I.-J. & Teubner, G. (2004), Transnational Governance and Constitutionalism (Oxford: Hart Publishing).
179. J¨urgensen, T. (2005), “Crime and Punishment: Retaliation under the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement System,” 39(2) JWT 327.
180. Kazazi, M. (1996), Burden of Proof and Related Issues: A Study on Evidence Before International Tribunals (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
181. Kearns, J. E. & Charnovitz, S. (2002), “Adjudicating Compliance in the WTO: A Review of DSU Article 21.5,” 5(2) JIEL 331.
182. Kelly, J. P. (2001), “The WTO and Global Governance: The Case for Contractual Treaty Regimes,” 7 Widener Law Symposium Journal 109.
183. Jenks, C. W. (2002), “Judicial Activism at the World Trade Organization: Developing Principles of Self-Restraint,” 22 Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 353.
184. Kelsen, H. (1949), General Theory of Law and State [1945], trans. A. Wedberg (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
185. Kelsen, H. (1966), Principles of International Law, rev. & ed. R. W. Tucker (2nd edn.; New York, London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston).
186. Kennedy, D. (1994), “The International Style in Postwar Law and Policy,” Utah Law Review 7.
187. Kennedy, D. L. M. & Southwick, J. D. (2002), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
188. Kennedy, R. F. (1993), “Libya v. United States: The International Court of Justice and the Power of Judicial Review,” 33 Virginia Journal of International Law 899.
189. Keyser, P. D. (2001), “Exploring WTO Dispute Settlement in US Anti-Dumping Act 1916: An Easy Case?” Jean Monnet Working Paper 11/01, available at www.jeanmonnetprogram.org.
190. Kingsbury, B. (1999), “Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?” 31 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 679.
191. Koh, H. H. (1997), “Why Do Nations Obey International Law?” 106 Yale Law Journal 2599.
192. Krajewski, M. (2001), “Democratic Legitimacy and Constitutional Perspectives of WTO Law,” 35(1) JWT 167.
193. Krisch, N. & Kingsbury, B. (2006), “Global Governance and Global Administrative Law in the International Legal Order,” 17(1) EJIL 1.
194. Kuilwijk, K. J. (1997), “Castro’s Cuba and the US Helms-Burton Act: An Interpretation of the GATT Security Exemption,” 31(3) JWT 49.
195. Kuyper, P. J. (1994), “The Law of GATT as a Special Field of International Law: Ignorance, Further Refinement or Self-Contained System of International Law?” 25 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 227.
196. Kuyper, P. J. (1995), “The New WTO Dispute Settlement System: The Impact on the Community,” in J. H. J. Bourgeois, F. Berrod & E. G. Fournier (eds.), The Uruguay Round Results: A European Lawyers’ Perspective (Brussels: European Interuniversity Press) 87.
197. Kuyper, P. J. (1997), “Remedies and Retaliation in the WTO: Are They Likely to be Effective? The State Perspective and the Company Perspective,” 91 American Society of International Law Proceedings 282.
198. Kuyper, P. J. (2000), “The Appellate Body and the Facts,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 309.
199. Lacarte, J. A. (2004), “Transparency, Public Debate and Participation by NGOs in the WTO: A WTO Perspective,” 7(3) JIEL 683.
200. Lalive, J.-F. (1964), “Contracts Between a State or a State Agency and a Foreign Company,” 13 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 987.
201. Lamy, P. (2006), Statement by Pascal Lamy, Director-General of the WTO, before the European Parliament Committee on International Trade, Brussels (October 17), available in the news archives of the WTO, www.wto.org.
202. Lauterpacht, H. (1950), International Law and Human Rights (London: Stevens & Sons Limited).
203. Lauterpacht, H. (1975), “Is International Law Part of the Law of England?” 25 Transactions of the Grotius Society 51 [1939], reprinted in E. Lauterpacht (ed.), International Law: Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht, vol. II (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 537.
204. Lauwaars, R. H. (2000), “Interpretations of International Agreements by National Courts: An EC View,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 509.
205. Lavender, N. (1997), “The Problem of the Margin of Appreciation,” 2 European Human Rights Law Review 380.
206. Leitner, K. & Lester, S. (2007), “WTO Dispute Settlement 1995--2006: A Statistical Analysis,” 10(1) JIEL 165.
207. Lennard, M. (2002), “Navigating by the Stars: Interpreting the WTO Agreements,” 5(1) JIEL 17.
208. Lester, Lord (1998), “Universality versus Subsidiarity: A Reply,” 3(1) European Human Rights Law Review 73.
209. Lester, S. N. (2001), “WTO Panel and the Appellate Body Interpretations of the WTO Agreement in US Law,” 35(3) JWT 521.
210. Letsas, G. (2004), “The Truth in Autonomous Concepts: How to Interpret the ECHR,” 15(2) EJIL 279.
211. Lew, J. D. M. (1978), Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration: A Study in Commercial Arbitration Awards (Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications).
212. Lewis, C. (1996), Remedies and the Enforcement of European Community Law (London: Sweet & Maxwell).
213. Lindroos, A. & Mehling, M. (2005), “Dispelling the Chimera of ‘Self-Contained Regimes’: International Law and the WTO,” 16 EJIL 857.
214. Long, O. (1987), Law and its Limitations in the GATT Multilateral Trade System (London, Dordrecht, Boston: Graham & Trotman, Martinus Nijhoff).
215. Louis, J.-V. (2000), “Some Reflections on the Implementation of WTO Rules in the European Community Legal Order,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 493.
216. Lowenfeld, A. F. (1991), “Binational Dispute Settlement under Chapter 19 of the Canada -- United States Free Trade Agreement: An Interim Appraisal,” 24 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 269.
217. Lowenfeld, A. F. (2002), International Economic Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
218. Lugard, M. (1998), “Scope of Appellate Review: Objective Assessment of the Facts and Issues of Law,” 1(2) JIEL 323.
219. Luzzatto, R. (1977), “International Commercial Arbitration and the Municipal Law of States,” 157 Recueil des Cours (IV).
220. Macdonald, R. St. J. (1993), “The Margin of Appreciation,” in R. St. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher & H. Petzold (eds.), The European System for the Protection of Human Rights (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers) 83.
221. Magnus, J. (2005), “Compliance with WTO Dispute Settlement Decisions: Is There a Crisis?” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 242.
222. Mahoney, P. (1997), “Universality versus Subsidiarity in the Strasbourg Case Law on Free Speech: Explaining Some Recent Judgments,” 2(4) European Human Rights Law Review 364.
223. Malanczuk, P. (1997), Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law (7th edn.; London, New York: Routledge).
224. Mann, F. A. (1959), “The Proper Law of Contracts Concluded by International Persons,” 35 BYIL 34.
225. Marceau, G. (1995), “Transition from GATT to WTO: A Most Pragmatic Operation,” 29(4) JWT 147.
226. Marceau, G. (1999), “A Call for Coherence in International Law: Praises for the Prohibition Against ‘Clinical Isolation’ in WTO Dispute Settlement,” 33 JWT 5.
227. Marceau, G. (2001), “Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions: The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other Treaties,” 35(6) JWT 1081.
228. Marceau, G. (2002), “WTO Dispute Settlement and Human Rights,” 13 EJIL 753.
229. Marceau, G. & Trachtman, J. P. (2002), “The Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: A Map of the World Trade Organization Law of Domestic Regulation of Goods,” 36(5) JWT 811.
230. Martha, R. S. J. (1996), “World Trade Dispute Settlement and the Exhaustion of Local Remedies Rule,” 30(4) JWT 107.
231. Matsushita, M., Schoenbaum, T. J. & Mavroidis, P. C. (2003), The World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
232. Mavroidis, P. C. (1992), “Surveillance Schemes: The GATT’s New Trade Policy Review Mechanism,” 13 Michigan Journal of International Law 374.
233. McCrudden, C. & Gross, S. G. (2006), “WTO Government Procurement Rules and the Local Dynamics of Procurement Policies: A Malaysian Case Study,” 17 EJIL 151.
234. McGivern, B. (2005), “Implementation of Panel and Appellate Body Rulings: An Overview,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 98.
235. McNair, Lord (1961), The Law of Treaties (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
236. McNelis, N. (2001), “The Role of the Judge in the EU and WTO: Lessons from the BSE and Hormones Cases,” 4(1) JIEL 189.
237. McRae, D. (1998), “The Emerging Appellate Jurisdiction in International Trade Law,” in J. Cameron & K. Campbell (eds.), Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organisation (London: Cameron May) 98.
238. McRae, D. (2000), “GATT Article XX and the WTO Appellate Body,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 219.
239. McRae, D. (2004), “What is the Future of WTO Dispute Settlement?” 7(1) JIEL 3.
240. Mercury, J. M. (1995), “Chapter 19 of the United States -- Canada Free Trade Agreement 1989--95: A Check on Administered Protection?” 15 Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 525.
241. Mitchell, A. (2005), “Due Process in WTO Disputes,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 144.
242. Monnier, P. (2001), “The Time to Comply with an Adverse WTO Ruling: Promptness within Reason,” 35(5) JWT 825.
243. Monroe, B. R. (2003), “WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure Bibliography,” 6(3) JIEL 745.
244. Montaguti, E. & Lugard, M. (2000), “The GATT 1994 and Other Annex 1A Agreements: Four Different Relationships?” 3(3) JIEL 473.
245. Moore, J. B. (1898), History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, vol. I (Washington: Government Printing Office).
246. Moore, M. (2002), “Foreword by the Director-General of the WTO,” 1(1) World Trade Review 3.
247. Moore, P. M. (1996), “The Decisions Bridging the GATT 1947 and the WTO Agreement,” 90 AJIL 317.
248. Morgenstern, F. (1950), “Judicial Practice and the Supremacy of International Law,” 27 BYIL 42.
249. Morris, J. H. C. & McClean, D. (2000), The Conflict of Laws (5th edn.; London: Sweet & Maxwell).
250. Morrisson, C. C. Jr. (1973), “Margin of Appreciation in European Human Rights Law,” 6 Revue des Droits de l’Homme (Human Rights Journal) 263.
251. Moyer, H. E. (1993), “Chapter 19 of the NAFTA: Binational Panels as the Trade Courts of Last Resort,” 27 International Lawyer 707.
252. Mueller-Holyst, B. (2005), “The Role of the Dispute Settlement Body in the Dispute Settlement Process,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 25.
253. Murphy, S. D. (1999), “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,” 93 AJIL 879.
254. Naiki, Y. (2004), “The Mandatory/Discretionary Doctrine in WTO Law: The US - Section 301 Case and its Aftermath,” 7(1) JIEL 23.
255. North, P. & Fawcett, J. J. (1999), Cheshire and North’s Private International Law (13th edn.; London, Edinburgh, Dublin: Butterworths).
256. O’Connor, S. D. (2001), “Altered States: Federalism and Devolution at the ‘Real’ Turn of the Millennium,” 60(3) Cambridge Law Journal 493.
257. O’Donnell, T. A. (1982), “The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: Standards in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights,” 4(4) Human Rights Quarterly 474.
258. Odell, J. S. (2005), “Chairing a WTO Negotiation,” 8(2) JIEL 425.
259. Oesch, M. (2003a), “Standards of Review in WTO Dispute Resolution,” 6(3) JIEL 635.
260. Oesch, M. (2003b), Standards of Review in WTO Dispute Resolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
261. Ohlhoff, S. & Schloemann, H. L. (1998), “Rational Allocation of Disputes and ‘Constitutionalisation’: Forum Choice as an Issue of Competence,” in J. Cameron & K. Campbell (eds.), Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organisation (London: Cameron May) 302.
262. Oppenheimer, A. (1994), The Relationship Between European Community Law and National Law: The Cases (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
263. Orrego Vicu˜na, F. (2004), International Dispute Settlement in an Evolving Global Society: Constitutionalization, Accessibility, Privatization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
264. Pager, S. (2003), “Strictness and Subsidiarity: An Institutional Perspective on Affirmative Action at the European Court of Justice,” 26 Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 35.
265. Palmeter, D. & Alexandrov, S. A. (2002), “Inducing Compliance in WTO Dispute Settlement,” in D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 646.
266. Palmeter, D. & Mavroidis, P. C. (1998), “The WTO Legal System: Sources of Law,” 92 AJIL 398.
267. Palmeter, D. & Mavroidis, P. C. (2004), Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization: Practice and Procedure (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
268. Pan, E. J. (1999), “Assessing the NAFTA Chapter 19 Binational Panel System: An Experiment in International Adjudication,” 40 Harvard International Law Journal 379.
269. Pauwelyn, J. (1998), “Evidence, Proof and Persuasion in WTO Dispute Settlement: Who Bears the Burden?” 1(2) JIEL 227.
270. Pauwelyn, J. (1999), “The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures as Applied in the First Three SPS Disputes,” 2(4) JIEL 641.
271. Pauwelyn, J. (2000), “Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rules Are Rules - Toward a More Collective Approach,” 94 AJIL 335.
272. Pauwelyn, J. (2001), “The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?” 95 AJIL 535.
273. Pauwelyn, J. (2002a), “The Use of Experts in WTO Dispute Settlement,” 51 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 325.
274. Pauwelyn, J. (2002b), “Cross-Agreement Complaints Before the Appellate Body: A Case Study of the EC-Asbestos Dispute,” 1 World Trade Review 63.
275. Pauwelyn, J. (2003a), Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
276. Pauwelyn, J. (2003b), “How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law?” 37(6) JWT 997.
277. Pauwelyn, J. (2006), “Adding Sweeteners to Softwood Lumber: The WTO--NAFTA ‘Spaghetti Bowl’ is Cooking,” 9(1) JIEL 197.
278. Pescatore, P. (1991 - loose-leaf), “Drafting and Analyzing Decisions on Dispute Settlement,” in P. Pescatore, W. J. Davey & A. F. Lowenfeld, Handbook of WTO/GATT Dispute Settlement (New York: Transnational Juris Publications - loose-leaf) 3.
279. Petersmann, E.-U. (1997a), The GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System: International Law, International Organizations and Dispute Settlement (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
280. Petersmann, E.-U. (1997b), International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
281. Petersmann, E.-U. (1997c), “Constitutionalism and International Organizations,” 17 Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 398.
282. Petersmann, E.-U. (1998a), “How to Constitutionalize International Law and Foreign Policy for the Benefit of Civil Society?’ 20 Michigan Journal of International Law 1.
283. Petersmann, E.-U. (1998b), “From the Hobbesian International Law of Coexistence to Modern Integration Law: The WTO Dispute Settlement System,” 1(2) JIEL 175.
284. Petersmann, E.-U. (1999), “Constitutionalism and International Adjudication: How to Constitutionalize the UN Dispute Settlement System?” 31 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 753.
285. Petersmann, E.-U. (2001), “European and International Constitutional Law: Time for Promoting ‘Cosmopolitan Democracy’ in the WTO,” in G. de B´urca & J. Scott (eds.), The EU and the WTO: Legal and Constitutional Issues (Oxford: Hart Publishing) 81.
286. Petersmann, E.-U. (2002a), “Time for a United Nations ‘Global Compact’ for Integrating Human Rights into the Law of Worldwide Organizations: Lessons from European Integration,” 13 EJIL 621.
287. Petersmann, E.-U. (2002b), “Taking Human Dignity, Poverty and Empowerment of Individuals More Seriously: Rejoinder to Alston,” 13 EJIL 845.
288. Petzold, H. (1993), “The Convention and the Principle of Subsidiarity,” in R. St. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher & H. Petzold (eds.), The European System for the Protection of Human Rights (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers) 41.
289. Pippin, K. J. (1999), “An Examination of the Developments in Chapter 19 Antidumping Decisions under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA): The Implications and Suggestions for Reform for the Next Century Based on the Experience of NAFTA after the First Five Years,” 21 Michigan Journal of International Law 101.
290. Puckett, A. L. & Reynolds, W. L. (1996), “Rules, Sanctions and Enforcement under Section 301: At Odds with the WTO?” 90 AJIL 675.
291. Quick, R. & Bl¨uthner, A. (1999), “Has the Appellate Body Erred? An Appraisal and Criticism of the Ruling in the WTO Hormones Case,” 2(4) JIEL 603.
292. Qureshi, A. H. (1990), “The New GATT Trade Policy Review Mechanism: An Exercise in Transparency or ‘Enforcement’?” 24(3) JWT 147.
293. Qureshi, A. H. (1992), “Some Reflections on the GATT TPRM, in the Light of the Trade Policy Review of the European Communities: A Legal Perspective,” 26(6) JWT 103.
294. Qureshi, A. H. (1996), The World Trade Organization: Implementing International Trade Norms (Manchester, New York: Manchester University Press).
295. Qureshi, A. H. & Grynberg, R. (2002), “United States Tax Subsidies Under Domestic International Sales Corporation, Foreign Sales Corporation and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act Legislation within the Framework of the World Trade Organization,” 36(5) JWT 979.
296. Rabel, E. (1945), The Conflict of Laws: A Comparative Study, vol. I (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).
297. Raustiala, K. (2003), “Rethinking the Sovereignty Debate in International Economic Law,” 6(4) JIEL 841.
298. Redfern, A. & Hunter, M. (1999), Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (London: Sweet & Maxwell).
299. Renouf, Y. (2005), “A Brief Introduction to Countermeasures in the WTO Dispute Settlement System,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 110.
300. Roberts, K. (1995), “Second-Guessing the Security Council: The International Court of Justice and its Powers of Judicial Review,” 7 Pace International Law Review 281.
301. Roessler, F. (1985), “The Provisional Application of the GATT: Note on the Report of the GATT Panel on the ‘Manufacturing Clause’ in the US Copyright Legislation,” 19(3) JWT 289.
302. Roessler, F. (2000), “The Institutional Balance between the Judicial and the Political Organs of the WTO,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 325.
303. Romano, C. (2001), “The Southern Bluefin Tuna Dispute: Hints of a World to Come… Like It or Not,” 32 Ocean Development & International Law 313.
304. Rosas, A. (2001), “Implementation and Enforcement of WTO Dispute Settlement Findings: An EU Perspective,” 4(1) JIEL 131.
305. Rosenne, S. (1997), The Law and Practice of the International Court, 1920-1996, vol. III (3rd edn.; The Hague, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers).
306. Rubin, A. P. (1977), “The International Legal Effects of Unilateral Declarations,” 71 AJIL 1.
307. Ryssdall, R. (1996), “The Coming of Age of the European Convention on Human Rights,” 1(1) European Human Rights Law Review 18.
308. Sacerdoti, G. (1997), “Appeal and Judicial Review in International Arbitration and Adjudication: The Case of the WTO Appellate Review,” in E.-U. Petersmann (ed.), International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System (London, The Hague, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 245.
309. Sampson, G. P. (2001), The Role of the World Trade Organization in Global Governance (Tokyo: United Nations University Press).
310. Sands, P., Mackenzie, R. & Shany, Y. (1999), Manual on International Courts and Tribunals (London: Butterworths).
311. Sarooshi, D. (2005), International Organizations and Their Exercise of Sovereign Powers (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
312. Sauv´e, P. & Zampetti, A. B. (2000), “Subsidiarity Perspectives on the New Trade Agenda,” 3(1) JIEL 83.
313. Schaefer, M. (1997), “Are Private Remedies in Domestic Courts Essential for International Trade Agreements to Perform Constitutional Functions with Respect to Sub-Federal Governments?” 17 Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 609.
314. Schaefer, M. (1998), “Section 301 and the World Trade Organization: A Largely Peaceful Coexistence To Date,” 1(1) JIEL 156.
315. Schaefer, M. (2000), “US States, Sub-Federal Rules, and the World Trading System,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 525.
316. Schloemann, H. L. & Ohlhoff, S. (1999), “‘Constitutionalization’ and Dispute Settlement in the WTO: National Security as an Issue of Competence,” 93 AJIL 424.
317. Schwartz, W. F. & Sykes, A. O. (2002), “The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization,” 31 Journal of Legal Studies S179.
318. Schwebel, S. M. (2000), “The Proliferation of International Tribunals: Threat or Promise?” in M. Andenas & D. Fairgrieve (eds.), Judicial Review International Perspective: Liber Amicorum in Honour of Lord Slynn of Hadley (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 3.
319. Scott, J. (2004), “International Trade and Environmental Governance: Relating Rules (and Standards) in the EU and the WTO,” 15(2) EJIL 307.
320. Shaffer, G. (2004), “Parliamentary Oversight of WTO Rule-Making: The Political, Normative, and Practical Contexts,” 7(3) JIEL 629.
321. Shany, Y. (2003), The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
322. Shany, Y. (2005), “Toward a General Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in International Law?” 16 EJIL 907.
323. Shaw, M. N. (1997), International Law (4th edn.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
324. Shearer, I. A. (1994), Starke’s International Law (11th edn.; London: Butterworths).
325. Sher, M. (2003), “Chapter 20 Dispute Resolution under NAFTA: Fact or Fiction?” 35 George Washington International Law Review 1001.
326. Shoyer, A. W. & Solovy, E. M. (2000), “The Process and Procedure of Litigating at the World Trade Organization: A Review of the Work of the Appellate Body,” 31 Law and Policy in International Business 677.
327. Sim, K. K. (2003), “Rethinking the Mandatory/Discretionary Legislation Distinction in WTO Jurisprudence,” 2(1) World Trade Review 33.
328. Sinclair, I. (1984), The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Manchester: Manchester University Press).
329. Singh, R., Hunt, M. & Demetriou, M. (1999), “Current Topic: Is there a Role for the ‘Margin of Appreciation’ in National Law after the Human Rights Act?” 4 European Human Rights Law Review 15.
330. Skouteris, T. (1999), “Customary Rules of Interpretation of Public International Law and Interpretative Practices in the WTO Dispute Settlement System,” in P. Mengozzi (ed.), International Trade Law on the 50th Anniversary of the Multilateral Trade System (Milan: Dott. A. Giuffre Editore) 113.
331. Smith, J. M. (2003), “WTO Dispute Settlement: The Politics of Procedure in Appellate Body Rulings,” 2 World Trade Review 65.
332. Spamann, H. (2004), “Standard of Review for World Trade Organization Panels in Trade Remedy Cases: A Critical Analysis,” 38(3) JWT 509.
333. Spamann, H. (2006), “The Myth of ‘Rebalancing’ Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement Practice,” 9(1) JIEL 31.
334. Spiermann, O. (1999), “The Other Side of the Story: An Unpopular Essay on the Making of the European Community Legal Order,” 10(4) EJIL 763.
335. Staker, C. (1987), “Public International Law and the Lex Situs Rule in Property Conflicts and Foreign Expropriations,” 58 BYIL 151.
336. Starke, J. G. (1936), “Monism and Dualism in the Theory of International Law,” 17 BYIL 66.
337. Steger, D. P. (2002), “The Appellate Body and its Contribution to WTO Dispute Settlement,” in D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 482.
338. Stehmann, O. (2000), “Foreign Sales Corporations under the WTO: The Panel Ruling on US Export Subsidies,” 34(3) JWT 127.
339. Stewart, R. B. (1992), “International Trade and Environment: Lessons from the Federal Experience,” 49 Washington and Lee Law Review 1329.
340. Stewart, T. P. (1993), The GATT Uruguay Round: A Negotiating History (1986--1992), vols. I--IV (Deventer: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers).
341. Stewart, T. P. (1996), The World Trade Organization: The Multilateral Trade Framework for the 21st Century and US Implementing Legislation (Chicago, IL: American Bar Association).
342. Stewart, T. P. & Johanson, D. S. (1999), “The WTO Beef Hormone Dispute: An Analysis of the Appellate Body Decision,” 5 UC Davis Journal of International Law and Policy 219.
343. Stiglitz, J. E. & Charlton, A. (2005), Fair Trade for All: How Trade Can Promote Development (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
344. Stuart, A. W. (1992), “‘I Tell Ya I Don’t Get No Respect!’: The Policies Underlying Standards of Review in US Courts as a Basis for Deference to Municipal Determinations in GATT Panel Appeals,” 23 Law and Policy in International Business 749.
345. Sutherland, P., Bhagwati, J., Botchwey, K. (2004), The Future of the WTO: Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millennium (Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi) (Geneva: WTO).
346. Swaine, E. T. (2000), “Subsidiarity and Self-Interest: Federalism at the European Court of Justice,” 41 Harvard International Law Journal 1.
347. Sykes, A. O. (2000), “The Remedy for Breach of Obligations under the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding: Damages or Specific Performance?” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 347.
348. Tarullo, D. K. (2002), “The Hidden Costs of International Dispute Settlement:WTO Review of Domestic Anti-Dumping Decisions,” 34 Law and Policy in International Business 109.
349. Tarullo, D. K. (2003), “Paved with Good Intentions: The Dynamic Effects of WTO Review of Anti-Dumping Action,” 2 World Trade Review 373.
350. Thomas, R. (2000), Legitimate Expectations and Proportionality in Administrative Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing).
351. Toope, S. J. (1990), Mixed International Arbitration: Studies in Arbitration Between States and Private Persons (Cambridge: Grotius Publications Limited).
352. Toth, A. G. (1994), “Is Subsidiarity Justiciable?” 19 European Law Review 268.
353. Trachtman, J. P. (1998), “Trade and… Problems, Cost--Benefit Analysis and Subsidiarity,” 9(1) EJIL 32.
354. Trachtman, J. P. (1999), “The Domain of WTO Dispute Resolution,” 40(2) Harvard International Law Journal 333.
355. Trachtman, J. P. (2006), “The Constitutions of the WTO,” 17(3) EJIL 623.
356. Trebilcock, M. & Howse, R. (1999), The Regulation of International Trade (2nd edn.; London and New York: Routledge).
357. Trebilcock, M. & Soloway, J. (2002), “International Trade Policy and Domestic Food Safety Regulation: The Case for Substantial Deference by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body under the SPS Agreement,” in D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 537.
358. Trumble, W. R. & Stevenson, A. J. (2002), Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles (5th edn.; Oxford: Oxford University Press).
359. United Nations (1983), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (New York: United Nations).
360. Valles, C. M. & McGivern, B. P. (2000), “The Right to Retaliate under the WTO Agreement: The ‘Sequencing’ Problem,” 34(2) JWT 63.
361. Van den Bossche, P. (2000), “Appellate Review in WTO Dispute Settlement,” in F. Weiss (ed.), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May) 305.
362. Van den Bossche, P. (2005a), The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text, Cases and Materials (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
363. Van den Bossche, P. (2005b), “The Making of the ‘World Trade Court’: The Origins and Development of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 63.
364. Van den Bossche, P. & Alexovicov´a, I. (2005), “Effective Global Economic Governance by the World Trade Organization,” 8(3) JIEL 667.
365. Van Panhuys, J. H. F. (1964), “Relations and Interactions Between International and National Scenes of Law,” 112 Recueil des Cours (II).
366. V´azquez, C. M. (2004), “Judicial Review in the United States and in the WTO: Some Similarities and Differences,” 36 George Washington International Law Review 587.
367. Verhoosel, G. (2002), National Treatment and WTO Dispute Settlement, Adjudicating the Boundaries of Regulatory Autonomy (Oxford: Hart Publishing).
368. Vermulst, E. (1999), “The Functioning of the Appellate Body after Four Years: Towards Rule Integrity,” 33(2) JWT 1.
369. Vermulst, E. & Graafsma, F. (2002), WTO Disputes: Anti-Dumping, Subsidies and Safeguards (London: Cameron May).
370. Vervaele, J. A. E., Betlem, G., de Lange, R. & Veldman, A. G. (1999), Compliance and Enforcement of European Community Law (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International).
371. Villalpando, S. M. (2002), “Attribution of Conduct to the State: How the Rules of State Responsibility May be Applied within the WTO Dispute Settlement System,” 5(2) JIEL 393.
372. Voon, T. & Yanovich, A. (2006), “The Facts Aside: The Limitation of World Trade Organization Appeals to Issues of Law,” 40(2) JWT 239.
373. Waincymer, J. (2002), WTO Litigation: Procedural Aspects of Formal Dispute Settlement (London: Cameron May).
374. Walker, N. (2001), “The EU and the WTO: Constitutionalism in a New Key,” in G. de B´urca & J. Scott (eds.), The EU and the WTO: Legal and Constitutional Issues (Oxford: Hart Publishing) 31.
375. Walker, V. R. (1998), “Keeping the WTO from Becoming the ‘World Trans-Science Organization’: Scientific Uncertainty, Science Policy, and Factfinding in the Growth Hormones Dispute,” 31 Cornell International Law Journal 251.
376. Weatherill, S. & Beaumont, P. (1999), EU Law (London: Penguin Books). Wehberg, H. (1959), “Pacta Sunt Servanda,” 53 AJIL 775.
377. Weiler, J. H. H. (1991), “The Transformation of Europe,” 100 Yale Law Journal 2403.
378. Weiler, J. H. H. (2000a), “Cain and Abel -- Convergence and Divergence in International Trade Law,” in J. H. H. Weiler (ed.), The EU, the WTO, and the NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade? (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 1.
379. Weiler, J. H. H. (2000b), “Epilogue: Towards a Common Law of International Trade,” in J. H. H. Weiler (ed.), The EU, the WTO, and the NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade? (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 201.
380. Weiler, J. H. H. (2001), “The Rule of Lawyers and the Ethos of Diplomats: Reflections on the Internal and External Legitimacy of WTO Dispute Settlement,” 35(2) JWT 191.
381. Weiler, T. J. (1995), “Curial Deference and NAFTA Chapter 19 Panels: Is What is Good for the Goose, Good for the Gander?” 1 Journal of International Legal Studies 83.
382. Weiss, E. B. (2000), “Strengthening National Compliance with Trade Law: Insights from Environment,” in M. Bronckers & R. Quick (eds.), New Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honour of John H. Jackson (The Hague, London, Boston: Kluwer Law International) 457.
383. Weiss, F. (2000), Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: Issues and Lessons from the Practice of Other International Courts and Tribunals (London: Cameron May).
384. Williams, B. G. (1999), “Non-Violation Complaints in the WTO System,” in P. Mengozzi (ed.), International Trade Law on the 50th Anniversary of the Multilateral Trade System (Milan: Dott. A. Giuffre Editore) 675.
385. Winham, G. R. (1998), “NAFTA Chapter 19 and the Development of International Administrative Law: Applications in Antidumping and Competition Law,” 32(1) JWT 65.
386. Wirth, D. A. (1998), “European Communities -- Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products,” 92 AJIL 755.
387. Wolfe, R. (2005), “Decision-Making and Transparency in the ‘Medieval’ WTO: Does the Sutherland Report Have the Right Prescription?” 8(3) JIEL 631.
388. Wolff, M. (1950), Private International Law (2nd edn.; Oxford: Clarendon Press).
389. World Trade Organization (1994), The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: The Legal Texts (Geneva: GATT Secretariat).
390. World Trade Organization (1995), Analytical Index: Guide to GATT Law and Practice (Geneva: World Trade Organization).
391. World Trade Organization (2001), The WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures: A Collection of the Relevant Legal Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
392. World Trade Organization (2006), International Trade Statistics 2006 (Geneva: WTO).
393. Yamane, H. (1998), “The WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism and Japanese Traders,” 1(4) JIEL 683.
394. Yanovich, A. & Voon, T. (2005), “What is the Measure at Issue?” in A. D. Mitchell (ed.), Challenges and Prospects for the WTO (London: Cameron May).
395. Yerxa, R. & Wilson, B. (2005), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
396. Zdouc, W. (2005), “The Reasonable Period of Time for Compliance with the Rulings and Recommendations Adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body,” in R. Yerxa & B. Wilson (eds.), Key Issues in WTO Dispute Settlement: The First Ten Years (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 88.
397. Zhang, X. (2003), “Direct Effect of the WTO Agreements: National Survey,” 9(2) International Trade Law and Regulation 35.
398. Zleptnig, S. (2002), “The Standard of Review in WTO Law: An Analysis of Law,Legitimacy and the Distribution of Legal and Political Authority,” 13(5) European Business Law Review 427.
399. Zoellner, C.-S. (2006), “Transparency: An Analysis of an Evolving Fundamental Principle in International Economic Law,” 27 Michigan Journal of International Law 579.
400. Zonnekeyn, G. A. (1999), “The Legal Status of WTO Panel Reports in the EC Legal Order,” 2(4) JIEL 713.