| ID | 136534 |
| Title Proper | Judicial authority in WTO law |
| Other Title Information | a commentary on the appellate body's decision in china-rare earths |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Qin, Julia Ya |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | The recent decision of the World TRADE Organization's Appellate Body (AB) in China-Rare Earths1 has put an end to the high-profile disputes over China's policies to restrict the exportation of rare earths and other raw materials. China has lost the case, and is expected to remove the export restrictions in compliance with the WTO decision. Despite resolution of the disputes, however, the AB's decision has failed to clarify a systemic issue at the heart of the disputes, namely, the relationship between the WTO agreements on one hand, and an accession protocol whose provisions modify the application of the WTO agreements to the acceded Member, on the other. In addition, the AB chose not to address the dissenting opinion from the Panel below and the views of several third parties that disagreed with the AB's prior ruling on the same legal issue in China-Raw Materials,2 thereby forgoing the opportunity to reexamine and possibly reverse its controversial ruling. The AB's decision thus raises some serious issues about judicial authority in WTO law. |
| `In' analytical Note | Chinese Journal of International Law Vol.13, No.4; Dec.2014: p.639-651 |
| Journal Source | Chinese Journal of International Law Vol: 13 No 4 |
| Standard Number | International Organization – IO |