|
The DSU expresses a preference for the parties to settle
their disputes through mutually agreed solutions (Article
3.7 of the DSU). However, unlike many other judicial systems, the DSU does
not allow the parties to settle their dispute on whatever terms they wish. Solutions
mutually acceptable to the parties to the dispute must also be consistent with
the WTO
Agreement and must not nullify or impair benefits accruing under the agreement
to any other Member (Articles
3.5 and 3.7 of
the DSU). If the matter has been formally raised in a request
for consultations, the mutually agreed solutions must be notified to the DSB and
the relevant Councils and Committees (Article
3.6 of the DSU). This is meant to inform the other WTO
Members and to give them an opportunity to raise whatever concern they
may have with regard to the settlement. Implicit in these rules is
an acknowledgement of the danger that the parties to a dispute might be tempted
to settle on terms that are detrimental to a third Member not involved in the
dispute, or in a way that is not entirely consistent with WTO law. Mutually
agreed solutions must therefore be notified to the DSB with sufficient information
for other Members.
In bilateral consultations or afterwards back to top
Bilateral consultations, which are required to take place at the beginning of any dispute, are intended to provide a setting in which the parties to a dispute should attempt to negotiate a mutually agreed solution. However, even when the consultations have failed to bring about a settlement and the dispute has progressed to the stage of adjudication, the parties are encouraged to continue their efforts to find a mutually agreed solution.
For instance, panels should consult regularly with
the parties and give them adequate opportunity to develop a mutually satisfactory
solution (Article
11 of the DSU). When panels
suspend their work at the request
of the complaining party (Article
12.12 of the DSU), this is usually to allow the parties to find a mutually
agreed solution. In one case, the parties to the dispute reached a mutually agreed
solution prior to the issuance of the interim report.1 In
another case, they did so after the issuance of the interim report, but before
the issuance of the final report to the parties.2 In
yet another case, the parties reached a mutually agreed solution after the issuance
but prior to the circulation3 of
the panel report to all Members.4 Where
the parties have found a settlement of the matter, the panel issues a report
in which it briefly describes the case and reports that the parties have reached
a mutually agreed solution (Article
12.7 of the DSU).
At the stage of appellate review, the appellant may withdraw the appeal at any time. One possible reason to do so would be that the parties have found a mutually agreed solution.
Notes:
1. Panel
Report, US
— DRAMS (Article 21.5 — Korea).
back to text
2. Panel
Report, EC
— Scallops (Canada); Panel
Report, EC
— Scallops (Peru and Chile).
back to text
3. On the procedural
stages of the interim report, the issuance and the circulation of the panel
report, see the section on the
Interim review
and the section on the
Issuance and
circulation of the final report.
back to text
4. Panel
Report, EC
— Butter.
back to text
|