‘Non-violation’ complaints (Article 64.2)
Is it possible to have intellectual property disputes in the WTO even if no agreement has been violated? If so, how could they be handled?
In general, disputes in the WTO involve allegations that a country has violated an agreement or broken a commitment. But in some situations a government can go to the Dispute Settlement Body even when an agreement has not been violated. This is called a non-violation complaint. It is allowed if one government can show that it has been deprived of an expected benefit because of another government’s action, or because of any other situation that exists.
Non-violation complaints are possible for goods and services (under GATT for goods and market-opening commitments in services). However, for the time being, members have not yet agreed on whether and how such complaints could be used under the TRIPS Agreement. Under Article 64.2 a “moratorium” (i.e. the agreement not to use TRIPS non-violation complaints) was to last for the first five years of the WTO (i.e. 1995–99), after which members were to make recommendations to the Ministerial Conference. This moratorium has been extended a number of times since then.
- 19 December 2015: WTO members secure “historic” Nairobi Package for Africa and the world
- 23 November 2015: Draft decision agreed on “non-violation” cases in intellectual property
- 7 December 2013: Days 3, 4 and 5: Round-the-clock consultations produce ‘Bali Package’
At the TRIPS Councilmeeting on 23 November 2015, delegations agreed to recommend to the 10th Ministerial Conference to once again extend the moratorium until the 11th Ministerial Conference in 2017. During this period, discussions on the applicability of these types of disputes to the TRIPS Agreement should continue. A number of members emphasized that discussions on a permanent solution to this question should begin immediately after the Nairobi Ministerial Conference.
The draft decision on “TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints” for the 10th Ministerial Conference says:
“We take note of the work done by the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights pursuant to our Decision of 7 December 2013 on “TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints” (WT/L/906), and direct it to continue its examination of the scope and modalities for complaints of the types provided for under subparagraphs 1(b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of GATT 1994 and make recommendations to our next Session, which we have decided to hold in 2017. It is agreed that, in the meantime, Members will not initiate such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement.”