The US returned with the incredible claim that it actually was in compliance, and carnival freedom casino hours what the WTO had really asked of the US was for it to convince this new "compliance" panel that the three laws were not in fact "disguised restrictions on trade" so that the US would, in its view, thus be entitled to the "morals defense" after all. The Appellate Body limited the offending "measures" in this matter to the three federal statutes listed above.
The parties were unable to agree sedvices what the period should be and so under the rules had to request arbitration to set the compliance period. Summary as of November Summary as of March The Appellate Body noted that there were several companies in the US that provided telephone and Internet betting services on horse races. The Dispute Panel had found several reasons why the US could not meet the chapeau. The Appellate Body disagreed with the Dispute Panel's reasoning, but nevertheless ruled that the US could not establish the chapeau because the US either sanctioned or permitted "remote gambling" in the US, primarily in the form of off-track account wagering on horse races. At its meeting on 24 Julythe DSB casino guid that the matter had been referred to arbitration as required under ArticleUNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING THE CROSS-BORDER SUPPLY OF. GAMBLING AND BETTING SERVICES. AB UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING THE. CROSS-BORDER SUPPLY OF GAMBLING. AND BETTING SERVICES. Report of the Panel. Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services –. Arbitration Pursuant to Article of the DSU. WT/DS WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE. UNITED.