IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v10y2007i4p749-793.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Eric H. Leroux

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. , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric H. Leroux, 2007. "Eleven Years of GATS Case Law: What Have We Learned?," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 749-793, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:10:y:2007:i:4:p:749-793
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgm014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Adlung, Rudolf, 2009. "Trade in healthcare and health insurance services: The GATS as a supporting actor (?)," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2009-15, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    2. Adlung, Rudolf & Morrison, Peter & Roy, Martin & Zhang, Weiwei, 2011. "Fog in GATS commitments: Boon or bane?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2011-04, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.

    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:oup:jieclw:v:10:y:2007:i:4:p:749-793. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.