Refusal of a Party to Provide Information. See Inferences Drawn from the Refusal of a Party to Provide Information (I.1)

Recourse to the DSU for Violations of the Covered Agreements. See also Prompt Settlement of Disputes – Article 3.3 of the DSU (P.4A); Suspension of Concessionsor Other Obligations (S.9)

R.0.1 US – Continued Suspension / Canada – Continued Suspension, paras. 371–373 and Footnote 782

(WT/DS320/AB/R, WT/DS321/AB/R)

As the Appellate Body has explained, Article 23.1 lays down the fundamental obligation of WTO Members to have recourse to the rules and procedures of the DSU when seeking redress of a violation of the covered agreements. Article 23 restricts WTO Members' conduct in two respects. First, Article 23.1 establishes the WTO dispute settlement system as the exclusive forum for the resolution of such disputes and requires adherence to the rules of the DSU. Secondly, Article 23.2 prohibits certain unilateral action by a WTO Member. Thus, a Member cannot unilaterally: (i) determine that a violation has occurred, benefits have been nullified or impaired, or that the attainment of any objective of the covered agreements has been impeded; (ii) determine the duration of the reasonable period of time for implementation; or (iii) decide to suspend concessions and determine the level thereof.

… We share the view of the panel in US – Section 301 Trade Act that the terms “[i]n such cases, Members shall” used in the chapeau of Article 23.2 make clear that Article 23.2 is “explicitly linked to, and has to be read together with and subject to, Article 23.1”. Therefore, the specific prohibitions of unilateral actions in Article 23.2 must be understood in the context of the overarching provision of Article 23.1. In other words, the unilateral actions prohibited by Article 23.2 are those taken by a Member with a view to seeking redress of a violation.