World Trade Organisation Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

World Trade Organisation Law - Essay Example Since 1947, many General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) panel reports proposed that "the burden of establishing a violation under Article XXIII: 1(a) of the GATT 1947 was on the complaining party"2. "As early as 1952, in Treatment by Germany of Imports of Sardines, concerning a complaint by Norway, the panel clearly put the burden of establishing a violation of the GATT 1947 obligations at issue on the complaining party."3 Many other panel reports followed to confirm this proposition. In 1978, in EEC - Measures on Animal Feed Proteins, the 1992 report in Canada - Import, Distribution and Sale of Certain Alcoholic Drinks by Provincial Marketing Agencies and the 1994 report in United States - Measures Affecting the Importation, Internal Sale and Use of Tobacco. Nevertheless, it is the 1997 panel report United States - Measures Affecting Imports of Woven Wool Shirts and Blouses from India which under the GATT 1994 constitutes the reference in the Burden of Proof issue and confirm ed that it is the complainant who should bring the proper pieces of evidence in order to prove his complaint. We will try in the following essay to explain the different rules that guide the admission, submitting and admissibility of evidence, and we will focus on the current system of Burden of Proof by analyz... Subsequently, and still at the same meeting, the party against which the complaint has been brought shall be asked to present its point of view."4 In the idea of the complainant having to show Burden of Proof, it is his duty to present the necessary evidence to prove his case. The complainant is the first party invited to do so and then the other party, the respondent, will have the possibility to present its own evidence. The evidences are usually presented at the first substantive meeting in order to build the case. This is the usual conduct of the dispute settlement procedure. Nevertheless, in Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes5, we are presented the Argentina - Textiles and Apparel dispute where Argentina has argued in his appeal that evidence should not have been accepted after this first substantive meeting and that it was inconsistent with Article 11 of the DSU. Argentina requested the evidence to be rejected but the Panel replied that it gave sufficient time to Argentina in order to prepare for this new submission. It finally stated: Article11 of the DSU does not establish time limits for the submission of evidence to a panel. Article12.1 of the DSU directs a panel to follow the Working Procedures set out in Appendix 3 of the DSU, but at the same time authorizes a panel to do otherwise after consulting the parties to the dispute. The Working Procedures in Appendix 3 also do not establish precise deadlines for the presentation of evidence by a party to the dispute. It is true that the Working Procedures 'do not prohibit' submission of additional evidence after the first