Article 17.6(ii) of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement is a one-of-a-kind treaty norm that sets out a deferential standard of review for issues of law by requiring panels to accept any ‘permissible’ interpretation. The Appellate Body’s approach to analysis under Article 17.6(ii), which precluded a finding of two competing interpretations being permissible, has long remained a point of criticism by the USA, a frequent respondent in anti-dumping disputes. In the wake of the first arbitration award under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Aarrangement (MPIA), which seeks to give more effect to the deferential standard of review, this article emphasizes the unprecedented character of Article 17.6(ii) in international law, argues that expectations of how it would operate arose from a misapprehension of Chevron deference in US law and that the whole issue may be another reason for having a separate dispute settlement track for trade remedies.

中文翻译：

---

世贸组织反倾销协议第17.6(ii)条：等待契诃夫的枪响

WTO 反倾销协议第 17.6(ii) 条是一项独一无二的条约规范，通过要求专家组接受任何“允许的”解释，规定了对法律问题的尊重审查标准。上诉机构根据第 17.6(ii) 条进行分析的方法排除了允许两种相互竞争的解释的结论，长期以来一直是反倾销争端中频繁被诉国美国的批评焦点。继多方临时上诉仲裁安排（MPIA）下的第一个仲裁裁决旨在使尊重的审查标准发挥更大作用之后，本文强调了第 17.6(ii) 条在国际法中前所未有的特征，