Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:43:28.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

United States: Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Betting and Gambling Services. WT/DS285/AB/R

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Joel P. Trachtman
Joel P. Trachtman*
Affiliation:
Of the Board of Editors
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
International Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 99 , Issue 4 , October 2005 , pp. 861 - 867
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, WTO Doc. WT/DS285/AB/R (Apr. 7, 2005) (adopted Apr. 20, 2005) [hereinafter Appellate Body Report]. WTO cases are available online at <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm>.

2 United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, WTO Doc. WT/DS285/R (Nov. 10, 2004) [hereinafter Panel Report].

3 Apr. 15,1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex IB, in World Trade Organization, The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: The Legal Texts 284 (1999) [hereinafter The Legal Texts], reprinted in 33ILM 1167. The legal texts are available online at <http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm>.

4 Opened for signature May 23,1969,1155 UNTS 331.

5 Services Sectoral Classification List: Note by the Secretariat, WTO Doc. MTN.GNS/W/120 (July 10, 1991).

6 Scheduling of Initial Commitments in Trade in Services: Explanatory Note, WTO Doc. MTN.GNS/W/164 (Sept. 3, 1993).

7 Instead, these two documents were prepared by the GATT secretariat in connection with GATS negotiations during the Uruguay Round.

8 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, para. 195.

9 The original Provisional Central Product Classification, Statistical Papers, Ser. M, No. 77, UN Sales No. E.91.XVII.7 (1991), was most recently revised by the Central Product Classification, Statistical Papers, Ser. M, No. 77, Version 1.1, UN Sales No. E.03.XVH.3 (2002). See <http:/’unstats.un.org/unsd/class/intercop/newsletter/classpub.htm>.

10 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, para. 201.

11 Id., para. 204.

12 Id., para. 208.

13 Footnote omitted.

14 This expression does not itself appear in the GATS.

15 Panel Report, supra note 2, para. 6.338.

16 Id., paras. 6.338, .355.

17 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, para. 231 (citation omitted).

18 Id., para. 232.

19 Id., para. 238.

20 Id., para. 248 (footnotes omitted).

21 Id., para. 250.

22 Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, in The Legal Texts, supra note 3, at 17.

23 The public order exception may be invoked only where a genuine and sufficiently serious threat is posed to one of the fundamental interests of society. [Author’s Note: This is footnote 5 in the GATS.]

24 Panel Report, supra note 2, para. 6.531.

25 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, paras. 309-10.

26 United States—Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia, WT/DS58/AB/RW (Oct. 22, 2001) (adopted November 21, 2001).

27 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, para. 326.

28 Panel Report, supra note 2, para. 6.607.

29 Appellate Body Report, supra note 1, para. 369.

30 Id., para. 372.

31 Id., para. 230 (citing GATS Articles XXVIII(h) (in para. 228) and VIII:5 (in para. 229), respectively).

32 In fact, the Appellate Body quotes with approval the panel’s language assimilating zero quotas that result from regulatory measures to quotas above zero. Id., para. 234. Therefore, it would seem that a qualitative measure that results in a reduction to a level above zero would be equally susceptible to prohibition. It is difficult to see the limits of Article XVI under this interpretation.

33 Id., para. 220 (citation omitted).