Why a state party to both the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and the WTO Agreements (WTO) would choose one or the other set of rules in a dispute with another fellow ECT and WTO contracting party

P.M. Laffont
Laffont, Pascal Marie

Article from: TDM 1 (2004), in International Commercial Arbitration

Summary

This article assesses the reasons why a state party to both the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and the WTO Agreements (WTO) would choose one or the other set of rules in a dispute with another fellow ECT and WTO contracting party. From the ECT point of view and without going back to either the ECT or the WTO dispute settlement provisions, there are a number of arguments that could be advanced in favour of a state party using ECT Article 27 (ECT 27) instead of the procedure under Dispute Settlement Understanding of the WTO Agreements (DSU).

To read this article you need to be a subscriber

Sign in

Forgot password?

Sign in

Subscribe

Fill in the registration form and answer a few simple questions to receive a quote.

Subscribe now

Why subscribe?

TDM journal

Access to TDM Journal articles (well over 2500 articles in total for Premium account holders)

Legal & regulatory

Access to Legal & Regulatory data (well over 10000 documents)

OGEMID

OGEMID membership (lively discussion platform bringing together the world's international dispute management community)

Suggested Citation

P.M. Laffont; "Why a state party to both the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and the WTO Agreements (WTO) would choose one or the other set of rules in a dispute with another fellow ECT and WTO contracting party"
TDM 1 (2004), www.transnational-dispute-management.com

URL: www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=26