Russia—Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit
World Trade Organization Panel
WT/DS512/R (2019)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
In 2014, Russia began restricting the transport of goods to or from Ukraine through Russian territory. Ukraine responded with a complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO), asserting that Russia’s actions violated Articles V and X of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Russia asserted a general defense under GATT Article XXI(b)(iii). The chapeau to Article XXI provided that nothing in the GATT should be construed to prevent any signatory “from taking any action which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests” (1) relating to fissionable materials or sources (subsection (b)(i)), (2) arms or other military supplies (subsection (b)(ii)), or (3) during time of war or other emergency in international relations (subsection (b)(iii)). Per Russia, an international-relations emergency existed between Russia and Ukraine. Russia (joined by the United States) further argued that Ukraine’s claim was not justiciable because the requirements of the chapeau—i.e., the determination of a country’s essential security interests and whether an action was necessary to protect such essential interests—were committed to the sole discretion of the country invoking Article XXI(b).
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.