The Dispute Settlement Body and the GATS
This paper we will analyze the reports issued and circulated by the Panel and by the Appellate Body in disputes involving the GATS in order to verify whether some trends have been established in the interpretation of this agreement by the DSU. The analysis will focus on three disputes (Mexico-Telecom, US-Gambling, and China-Electronic Payment Services) that are of special relevance to this article due to the fact that all the claims brought by the complainants in the requests for consultations were under the GATS. The three disputes analyzed in this paper demonstrate that DSB’s interpretation of specific commitments scheduled within the GATS is cohesive and straightforward in analyzing the commitments and the limitations imposed by Members.
- Celli U Jr, Sayeg F (2016) Estados Unidos – Medidas que Afetam a Prestação Transfronteiriça de Serviços de Jogo e Aposta (DS285). In: Domingues J (org) OMC. Juruá Editora, CuritibaGoogle Scholar
- Sayeg F, Borges Furlaneto K (2016) China — certain measures affecting Electronic Payment Services (DS 413). In: Panzini F, Spadano L, Alvim E, Rosar S (org) Políticas comerciais e industriais da China à luz das regras da OMC: lições de interesse para o Brasil. Elsevier, São PauloGoogle Scholar
- WTO, Analytical Index. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/gatt_ai_e.htm. Accessed 4 July 2017
- WTO GATS. https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats_01_e.htm. Accessed 4 July 2017
- WTO. GATT. https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/06-gatt_e.htm. Accessed 4 July 2017