SUBJECT INDEX BY CASE: APPELLATE BODY REPORTS

K-L

 

Index: A  B  C-D  E-F  G-H  I  J  K-L  M-S  T  U-Z 


ON THIS PAGE:

> Korea — Alcoholic Beverages
> Korea — Dairy
> Korea — Various Measures on Beef

Korea — Alcoholic Beverages (WT/DS75/AB/R, WT/DS84/AB/R)     back to top

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6), classification as issue of law or fact, credibility and weight of evidence S.3.3.5

directly competitive or substitutable products (GATT III:2, Ad Note to second sentence) D.1.1–9

criteria

consumer preferences D.1.8, N.1.6.1–7

cross-price elasticity D.1.7, N.1.6.5

interchangeability D.1.2, N.1.6.1

determination on case by case basis D.1.8–9, N.1.6.6–7, N.1.8.4

as dynamic relationship (including possibility of latent demand) D.1.1–2, D.1.4–5, N.1.6.1–3

potential to compete as determining factor N.1.6.1

object and purpose of provision D.1.4, D.1.6, N.1.6.2, N.1.6.4

objective assessment D.1.8–9, N.1.6.7

ordinary meaning D.1.2, N.1.6.1

interpretation of covered agreements

narrow/broad interpretation D.1.3

object and purpose D.1.4, D.1.6, N.1.6.2, N.1.6.4

ordinary meaning N.1.6.1

“like product” (GATT III:2)

directly competitive or substitutable products distinguished N.1.5.3

directly competitive or substitutable products distinguished (Ad Note to second sentence) D.1.3

narrow interpretation, need for D.1.3, N.1.5.3

national treatment (GATT III:1) (general principle)

“so as to afford protection”

equality of competitive conditions N.1.6.1, N.1.6.2, N.1.6.4

protection of competitive relationship N.1.6.1, N.1.6.2

panel reports, rationale, need for (DSU 12.7) P.1.1.1

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

alleged disregard or distortion of evidence by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”) S.7.3.6

discretion/independence in evaluation of evidence S.7.3.6

“objective assessment of matter before it”, de minimis error S.7.3.6

Korea — Dairy (WT/DS98/AB/R)     back to top

burden of proof

prima facie case B.3.2.6

examination of respondent’s defence and evidence, timing B.3.2.6

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

completion of legal analysis C.4.7–8

factual basis

contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.7–8

limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.7

consultations (DSU 4), establishment of panel as prerequisite T.6.1.7

determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4) (requirements), evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)), inclusion of all listed factors in notification to Committee on Safeguards (SG 12.2) S.1.41.2

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), prejudice to party, relevance T.6.2.7–8

GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO G.2.1.3

GATT 1994, incorporation into WTO Agreement (WTO Annex 1A) G.2.1.3

GATT as integral part of WTO (WTO II:2) G.2.1.3

interpretation of covered agreements

context (VCLT 31(2)), treaty/treaties as a whole I.3.7.7

effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.7

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel) R.2.2.6–R.2.2.7

claims and arguments distinguished C.1.6, R.2.2.6–R.2.2.7

due process T.6.2.7–8

evidence to support claim distinguished C.1.6

summary, sufficiency R.2.1.5, T.6.1.7

listing of articles of agreement allegedly breached R.2.2.6–7, T.6.2.7–8

necessity test, proportionality requirement S.1.34.1

ordinary meaning of, “emergency action” S.1.45.1

proportionality, safeguard measures (SG 5.1) (“to the extent necessary”) S.1.34.1

request for establishment of panel (requirements) (DSU 6.2)

consultations, indication as to whether held T.6.1.7

writing R.2.1.5, T.6.1.7

safeguard measures (SG/GATT XIX)

application of measures “to the extent necessary” (SG 5.1) S.1.34.1

justification, need for, in case of quantitative restrictions (SG 5.1, second sentence) S.1.35.1

characteristics

exceptional nature of remedy S.1.45.1

relationship between SG Agreement and GATT XIX S.1.44.3–4

SG Agreement as integral part of WTO Agreement (WTO II:2) G.2.1.3, S.1.44.3–4

conditions (SG 2)

“such increased quantities”

“as a result of unforeseen developments” (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.50.2

as pertinent issue of fact and law S.1.50.2

notification and consultation (SG 12)

adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3), meaningful exchange, need for S.1.41.1

of all pertinent information (SG 12.2) S.1.41.1–2

all factors listed in SG 12.2 and 4.2(a), need for S.1.41.2

date of introduction of measure S.1.41.1

precise description of proposed measure S.1.41.1

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2)

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1) R.2.1.5, T.6.1.7

“specific”, “sufficient to present the problem clearly” R.2.1.5, T.6.1.7

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11), alleged disregard or distortion of evidence by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”), obligation to examine and evaluate evidence S.7.3.11

WTO Agreement, integral parts (WTO II) G.2.1.3, I.3.7.7

Korea — Various Measures on Beef (WT/DS161/AB/R, WT/DS169/AB/R)     back to top

“in accordance with”, AG 1(a)(ii) A.1.2.1

AG Agreement, Schedules of Commitments (AG 3) [and AG Annex 3] R.2.2.11

Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) (AG 1(a)/Annex 3)

Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) (AG 1(a)/Annex 3), Current Total AMS A.1.2.2

Base Total AMS/commitment levels (AG 1(a)/Annex 3), absolute nature A.1.1.1

“constituent data and methodology”, absence for beef A.1.2.2

market price support (AG Annex 3(8)), “production eligible” A.1.35.1

“provisions of Annex 3”/“constituent data and methodology” (AG 1(a)(ii)), priority A.1.2.2

beef, absence of “constituent data and methodology” (AG 1(a)/Annex 3) A.1.2.2

interpretation of covered agreements, ordinary meaning A.1.2.1

judicial economy

panel’s discretionary power to determine which claims must be examined J.1.19

ruling on one element of dispute rendering consideration of other elements moot G.3.2.1, R.2.3.8, S.7.2.7

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel) R.2.2.11

summary, sufficiency, reference to AG 3 and 6 as incorporating Schedule of Commitments and AG Annex 3 R.2.2.11, T.6.2.11

measures necessary to secure compliance with GATT-consistent measure (GATT XX(d)), finding of inconsistency with GATT III:4, conclusiveness G.3.2.1, R.2.3.8

national treatment (GATT III:1) (general principle), “so as to afford protection”, equality of competitive conditions N.1.11.3–4

necessity test (GATT XX(d)) G.3.6.1–7

availability of alternative WTO-consistent measure G.3.6.5–7

“reasonably available”/“reasonably be expected” G.3.3A.15, G.3.6.5–7

determination of necessary level of protection, Member’s right of (GATT XX(b)/XX(d)) G.3.6.7

“indispensable” and “necessary” distinguished G.3.6.1–4

order of analysis G.3.3A.8

relevant factors

contribution to realization of end pursued (objective-pursued test) G.3.6.3–4

importance of common interests protected by the law or regulation to be enforced G.3.6.2, G.3.6.4

restrictive effect on international commerce/imported goods G.3.6.3–4

as weighing and balancing process G.3.6.4–6

order of analysis

GATT III:4/GATT XX G.3.2.1, R.2.3.8

necessity test (GATT XX(d)) G.3.3A.8

regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4)

GATT XX G.3.2.1

“less favourable treatment” N.1.11.3–6

detrimental effect N.1.11.3, N.1.11.10, T.4.2A.5.24

equality of competitive conditions as test N.1.11.3–4

formal differentiation in treatment, relevance N.1.11.3–5

market effect as test N.1.11.5–6


The texts reproduced here do not have the legal standing of the original documents which are entrusted and kept at the WTO Secretariat in Geneva.