WTO panel and appellate body interpretations of the SPS agreement: Reflections and considerations
By: Kou, Rohin and Rasool, Irfan
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: Kashmir Journal of Legal Studies Description: 10(1), Jul, 2023: p.143-160.
In:
Kashmir Journal of Legal StudiesSummary: The Appellate Body and the Panels are responsible for clarification of rules and provisions as provided in the SPS Agreement. The jurisprudence developed by means of interpretation has far reaching impact on the SPS policies of the member countries. With respect to the initial burden of proof, the Appellate Body has held that the obligation is on the complaining party to prove non confinement with the SPS Agreement and later on this burden shifts to another party to oppose the claimed disparity. The SPS Agreement is silent as far as standard of review is concerned but has emphasized that the standard of proof for determination as well as for legal narration of facts has been pronounced by Article 11 of the DSU. With respect to the admissibility of scientific information, the Appellate Body has held that such information should be sought from individual experts. The Appellate Body and the Panels has also interpreted the principles of harmonization, risk assessment, precautionary principle and transparency. The narrower interpretation of special and differential treatment provisions meant for the developing countries has restricted their effective implementation. Reproduced
http://kashmirjournaloflegalstudies.edu.in// b481-4e09-8ecf-05057a46ed5d.pdf
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 10(1), Jul, 2023: p.143-160 | Available | AR130541 |
The Appellate Body and the Panels are responsible for clarification of rules and provisions as provided in the SPS Agreement. The jurisprudence developed by means of interpretation has far reaching impact on the SPS policies of the member countries. With respect to the initial burden of proof, the Appellate Body has held that the obligation is on the complaining party to prove non confinement with the SPS Agreement and later on this burden shifts to another party to oppose the claimed disparity. The SPS Agreement is silent as far as standard of review is concerned but has emphasized that the standard of proof for determination as well as for legal narration of facts has been pronounced by Article 11 of the DSU. With respect to the admissibility of scientific information, the Appellate Body has held that such information should be sought from individual experts. The Appellate Body and the Panels has also interpreted the principles of harmonization, risk assessment, precautionary principle and transparency. The narrower interpretation of special and differential treatment provisions meant for the developing countries has restricted their effective implementation. Reproduced
http://kashmirjournaloflegalstudies.edu.in// b481-4e09-8ecf-05057a46ed5d.pdf
There are no comments for this item.