No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In the Hormones case the Appellate Body has sharply criticized the legal analysis of the lower panels, upholding seven findings, reversing six and modifying four. This article looks critically at the Appellate Body's interpretation of certain issues and concludes that its ruling contains a number of legal weaknesses. Not only does the Appellate Body creatively interpret the law without giving a clear reasoning for such interpretation (burden of proof), but also leaves certain issues undecided (the relationship between general and specific obligations of the SPS Agreement as well as the relationship between the GATT 1994 and the SPS Agreement). With its broad interpretation of risk assessment and its insistence on the notion of judicial economy, the Appellate Body fails to serve its fundamental role in assisting the DSB to achieve a satisfactory settlement of the matter.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.