Abstract
The contents and the status of cessation is considerably the same in the law of State responsibility and the GATT/WTO. However, the legitimacy of reparation, especially restitution and compensation, in the GATT/WTO is controversial. As to restitution, the arguments that retrospective remedies are contrary to the GATT/WTO practice are questionable. Compensation under the GATT/WTO instruments is not a form of reparation, but monetary compensation offered in US—Section 110(5) Copyright Act has some elements of compensation under the law of State responsibility. Finally, there seem to be two possibilities under the existing WTO disciplines when reparation could be provided on a case-by-case basis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
