ATTENTION: The software behind KU ScholarWorks is being upgraded to a new version. Starting July 15th, users will not be able to log in to the system, add items, nor make any changes until the new version is in place at the end of July. Searching for articles and opening files will continue to work while the system is being updated.
If you have any questions, please contact Marianne Reed at mreed@ku.edu .
Interpreting Interpretation: Textual, Contextual, and Pragmatic Interpretative Methods fo International Trade Law
dc.contributor.author | Bhala, Raj | |
dc.contributor.author | Witmer, Eric | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-04-07T18:03:43Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-04-07T18:03:43Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Raj Bhala and Eric Witmer, Interpreting Interpretation: Textual, Contextual, and Pragmatic Interpretative Methods fo International Trade Law (March 2020). Connecticut Journal of International Law, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2020. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3570665 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1808/30275 | |
dc.description.abstract | The conventional wisdom as to how the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body must interpret disputed terms in a treaty is incomplete, and even potentially misleading. The conventional wisdom says the Appellate Body is restricted to the tools provided by Articles 31-32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The key tool is a mechanical, lexicographic hammer, namely, finding the plain meaning of a word or phrase at issue in a case between two WTO Members, with occasional recourse to surrounding passages, and if pressed, to the purpose of the treaty in which the disputed term is located. But those Articles amount to a larger tool kit than the conventional wisdom recognizes.In truth, those Articles allow for three wide categories of techniques, Textualist, Contextualist, and Pragmatic, for interpretation. These techniques are rich, nuanced tools familiar in American Jurisprudence and English Literary Theory. A complete and transparent account of the tools the Appellate Body has at its disposal to make decisions should acknowledge this tripartite taxonomy, and thereby appreciate the intra- and inter-disciplinary nature of international trade treaty interpretation that, at least in theory, is possible. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Connecticut Journal of International Law, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2020 | en_US |
dc.relation.isversionof | https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3570665 | en_US |
dc.subject | Word Trade Organization | en_US |
dc.subject | WTO | |
dc.subject | International | |
dc.subject | Appellate body | |
dc.subject | Vienna Convention | |
dc.subject | Law of Treaties | |
dc.subject | Textualism | |
dc.subject | Contextualism | |
dc.subject | Pragmatism | |
dc.subject | International trade | |
dc.subject | Treaty | |
dc.subject | Interpretation | |
dc.title | Interpreting Interpretation: Textual, Contextual, and Pragmatic Interpretative Methods fo International Trade Law | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
kusw.kuauthor | Bhala, Raj | |
kusw.kudepartment | Law | en_US |
kusw.oaversion | Scholarly/refereed, publisher version | en_US |
kusw.oapolicy | This item meets KU Open Access policy criteria. | en_US |
dc.rights.accessrights | openAccess | en_US |