(WT/DS339/AB/R, WT/DS340/AB/R, WT/DS342/AB/R)

The Panel proceeded, therefore, on the basis that the commitment made by China in paragraph 93 of its Accession Working Party Report is enforceable in WTO dispute settlement proceedings and should be interpreted in accordance with the customary rules of interpretation as codified in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention. Neither of these propositions has been disputed at any point in these proceedings, including in this appeal.

(WT/DS363/AB/R)

…[A] measure can regulate both goods and services and that, as a result, the same measure can be subject to obligations affecting trade in goods and obligations affecting trade in services. This does not necessarily mean that the same measure would also be subject to China's trading rights commitments, because a measure regulating goods may not affect who has the right to trade those goods. In this dispute, however, it is uncontested that Article 30 of the Film Regulation restricts who may engage in the importation of films. The issue raised by China's appeal is whether what is imported by the entity designated under Article 30 is a good. In other words, in this dispute, the applicability of China's trading rights commitments to Article 30 of the Film Regulation depends on the issue of whether that provision regulates goods.…