The Question of “Territory” in the WTO Jurisprudence: A Critique of Panel's Decision on US-Origin Marking Requirement Dispute

Authors

Yuanyuan Ren

Abstract

This article draws on the US—Origin Marking Requirement case study to critically examine the concept of “territory” under the World Trade Organization (WTO) law, particularly in relation to trade with contested territories among WTO members. It argues that while trade with contentious territories is not explicitly covered in current WTO rules, WTO law does provide a regulatory framework for tackling such issues. Nevertheless, resolving trade disputes involving contested territories at the WTO remains challenging, particularly due to the limited discussion on the notion of “territory” and the national security exceptions in WTO jurisprudence. The US—Origin Marking Requirement case marks the first WTO dispute concerning alleged discriminatory treatment of imports from areas subject to controversial sovereign claims, offering a valuable opportunity for WTO adjudicators to revisit the trade-security nexus within the WTO regime. However, the panel appears reluctant to substantively engage with the legal meanings of “territory” and “country” in WTO law, particularly in its interpretation of “emergency in international relations” under Article XXI(b)(iii) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and its consideration of the applicability of the Agreement on Rules of Origin (ARO) rules in the dispute. Taken together, the first stage of the case represents a missed opportunity for the WTO panel to address a long-overlooked but increasingly pressing issue in international trade law—trade with contested territories.

Recommended Citation

Ren, Yuanyuan (2026) "The Question of “Territory” in the WTO Jurisprudence: A Critique of Panel's Decision on US-Origin Marking Requirement Dispute," Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 6.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjicl/vol16/iss1/6