Skip Navigation


Journal of International Economic Law Advance Access originally published online on July 10, 2007
Journal of International Economic Law 2007 10(4):749-793; doi:10.1093/jiel/jgm014
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
10/4/749    most recent
jgm014v2
jgm014v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leroux, E. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press 2007, all rights reserved

Eleven Years of GATS Case Law: What Have We Learned?

Eric H. Leroux*

*Senior Counsel, Trade Law Bureau, Government of Canada. E-mail: eric.leroux{at}international.gc.ca.


  Abstract

The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) negotiators faced a significant challenge when having to craft a comprehensive set of disciplines governing multilateral trade in services, and the result is somewhat complex. Some obligations, in particular the most favoured-nation treatment (MFN) obligation, apply across the board. Others, like the market access and national treatment obligations, apply only in respect of service sectors of a Member's choosing. There is overlap between the market access and national treatment obligations, and the relationship between these two disciplines and those on domestic regulation is not clearly established. Additional obligations have been adhered to on a voluntary basis, in particular in the areas of telecommunications and financial services. In general, the interpretation and understanding of Members’ Schedules of Specific Commitments proves to be a laborious exercise. This provides fertile ground for difficult and often sensitive interpretive issues to arise. Although Members have thus far not made extensive use of dispute settlement procedures to resolve them, existing World Trade Organization (WTO) decisions already show the reach of GATS disciplines and their potential impact on Members’ policies and regulations. The Gambling case has, in particular, sparked a debate as to what should be the right balance between trade constraints and the autonomy of Members’ service regulators. This article reviews the GATS case law with a view to offering a critical assessment of the main systemic issues that have been addressed by WTO adjudicatory bodies. These issues are, respectively, the scope of application of the GATS, the interpretation of specific commitments in Members’ Schedules, market access, non-discriminatory treatment, and general exceptions.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.