The WTO dispute settlement process: Did the negotiators get what they wanted?

World Trade Review

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 99-118

  Stoler, Andrew L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930458090     PISSN: 14747456     EISSN: 14753138     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S147474560400165X     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Eric White, Remarks at the International Bar Association Conference in Geneva. Future Directions in WTO Dispute Settlement, March 2003.
2. James Bacchus, ‘Woulda, coulda, Shoulda: the Consolations of WTO Disput Settlement’, address to the International Bar Association, Geneva, 20 March 2003, p. 8.
3. Richard O. Cunningham and Troy H. Cribb, ‘Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of “Free Flow of Trade” A Review of WTO Dispute Settlement of US Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Measures’, Journal of International Economic Law, March 2003.
4. Debra Steger, Informal comments on Paul C. Rosenthal’s paper, March 2003.
5. James P. Durling, ‘Deference, But Only When Due: WTO Review of Antidumping Measures’, Journal of International Economic Law, March 2003.
6. John Greenwald, ‘WTO Dispute Settlement: An Exercise in Trade Law Legislation?’, Journal of International Economic Law, March 2003.
7. Claude E. Barfield, Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy: The Future of the World Trade Organization (The AEI Press, 2001), 127.
8. Richard O. Cunningham and Troy H. Cribb, ‘Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of ‘Free Flow of Trade, A Review of WTO Dispute Settlement of US Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Measures’, Journal of International Economic Law, March 2003.
9. John Greenwald, ‘WTO Dispute Settlement : An Exercise in Trade Law Legislation?’, Journal of International Economic Law, March 2003, page 123.