Principle of necessity in China – intellectual property rights

The paper aims to examine whether the panel and parties of China – Intellectual Property Rights could have applied the general principle of necessity developed under Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. This paper specifically seeks to examine applicability of the general principle of necessity in the World Trade Organization (WTO) tribunal's analysis of the provisions of the Berne Convention, which is incorporated by Article 9 of the Trade‐related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.

The paper performs a series of documentary/archival research and case studies of the jurisprudence and interpretative methods of the WTO adjudicative bodies.

The general principle of necessity in WTO jurisprudence is applicable when a measure taken by a WTO member is inconsistent with WTO provisions, the measure is highly relevant to the sovereignty of the WTO member, the WTO member seeks to justify the measure by applying one of the exceptions articulated in the WTO Agreements, and the relevant language of necessity exists in the exception provisions. If these requirements are met, the general principle of necessity would be applicable to other provision of WTO Agreements, including Article 17 of the Berne Convention incorporated by Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement, provided that the parties of the dispute raise the defense in their arguments.

By examining the application of the general principle of necessity and its relevance to sovereignty in one of the most recent disputes in the WTO, this paper analyzes a decision that could have considerable impacts on the jurisprudence of future disputes regarding enforcement of intellectual property rights in the WTO regime.