IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v12y2013i02p427-431_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Easy Is an Easy Case for a Complainant? Comment on US–Zeroing (Korea) DS402

Author

Listed:
  • HUERTA-GOLDMAN, JORGE A.

Abstract

This article is about how easy a WTO case is when the defendant concedes the claims, the description of the facts, and the evidence presented by the complainant. In US–Zeroing (Korea), the United States did just that. We explore whether Korea obtained any additional benefit by having an easy case. We identified some small benefits at the preparation stage of the case arising from the favourable precedents and shorter time frames only at the Panel stage. There were, however, some additional costs for the complainant stemming from the Panel's reasoning when it addressed case law. In our opinion, benefits were few. Korea was obliged in any case to engage in two years of multilateral procedures before three old measures, which were not defended by the defendant, were revoked.

Suggested Citation

  • Huerta-Goldman, Jorge A., 2013. "How Easy Is an Easy Case for a Complainant? Comment on US–Zeroing (Korea) DS402," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 427-431, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:12:y:2013:i:02:p:427-431_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474745612000626/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mitchell, Andrew D. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2016. "China–Autos: Haven't We Danced this Dance Before?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 303-325, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:12:y:2013:i:02:p:427-431_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.