Articles

• Henckels, Caroline

Abstract

The proliferation of free trade agreements which share dispute settlement jurisdiction with the WTO has added to claims of disintegration within international trade law. Recent WTO jurisprudence is indicative of the limits of WTO members’ ability to invoke provisions of an FTA as a ‘jurisdictional defence’ where the dispute implicates trade measures under both WTO and FTA rules. Such uncertainty in the law has the potential not only to create issues of incoherent jurisprudence, but also to threaten the stability and predictability of the multilateral trading system. These issues are likely to continue to arise as FTAs continue to grow in abundance while the Doha round is stalled. Based on analysis of a selection of state–state disputes before other fora such as the International Court of Justice, this article argues that in the interest of the effective administration of justice, the WTO's judicial organ should use its inherent power of comity to decline to exercise jurisdiction so that the dispute can be resolved by an FTA tribunal where a dispute is inextricably connected with a dispute under an FTA and that exercising jurisdiction would not be reasonable in the circumstances.