Professor Taniguchi was a prominent member of the Appellate Body from 2000 to 2007, during which he served in the department for twenty-one appeals, many of which focused on pioneering issues. In his honor, this article focuses on a topic that was a key element in the last dispute, where Professor Taniguchi was a member of the Appellate Body. This dispute concerned Brazil`s restrictions on imports of retreaded tyres and raised important questions about the relationship between regional trade agreements and WTO commitments. Wto agreements recognize that South Asian countries are eligible for assistance if their objective is to facilitate trade between their parties. They also recognize that, in certain circumstances, these agreements could harm the commercial interests of other countries. Normally, the creation of a customs union or free trade area would be contrary to the principle of non-discrimination of all WTO members (“most-favoured-nation”). In the Brazil Tyres database, the Appellate Body examined Brazil`s import ban on used and retreaded tyres and Brazil`s exemption from that ban in order to implement a negative decision resulting from a decision of an RTA dispute settlement tribunal. Brazil argued that the WTO panel had correctly found that Brazil`s waiver of the ban on certain retreaded tyres was allowed because it had been ordered by a Mercado Común del Sur (MERCOSUR) tribunal. The Appellate Body annulled the Body and found that the implementation of measures to ensure compliance with a MERCOSUR dispute settlement body does not necessarily sufficiently justify Brazil`s action.

. . .