ARB.2.1 Japan – Alcoholic Beverages II, para. 11

(WT/DS8/15, WT/DS10/15, WT/DS11/13)

Article 21(1) of the DSU stipulates that “prompt compliance with recommendations and rulings of the DSB is essential in order to ensure effective resolution of disputes to the benefit of all Members” (emphasis added). This obligation is further elaborated in Article 21(3) of the DSU, where it is stipulated that “if it is impracticable to comply immediately with the recommendations and rulings, the Member concerned shall have a reasonable period of time in which to do so” (emphasis added). …

ARB.2.2 EC – Hormones, para. 39

(WTDS26/15, WT/DS48/13)

Withdrawal is the preferred means of implementation under Article 3.7 of the DSU, and prompt compliance with the recommendations and rulings of the DSB is essential under Article 21.1. It would not be in keeping with the requirement of prompt compliance to include in the reasonable period of time, time to conduct studies or to consult experts to demonstrate the consistency of a measure already judged to be inconsistent. …

ARB.2.3 EC – Hormones, para. 41

(WTDS26/15, WT/DS48/13)

To grant the European Communities a further two years, from the date of adoption by the DSB of the Appellate Body Report and Panel Reports, to conduct the risk assessment that was required as of 1 January 1995 would not be consistent with the provisions of the DSU requiring prompt compliance with DSB recommendations and rulings, nor with the obligations of the European Communities under the SPS Agreement.

ARB.2.4 Chile – Alcoholic Beverages, para. 38

(WT/DS87/15, WT/DS110/14)

The DSU clearly stressed the systemic interest of all WTO Members in the Member concerned complying “immediately” with the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. Reading Articles 21.1 and 21.3 together, “prompt” compliance is, in principle, “immediate” compliance. At the same time, however, should “immediate” compliance be “impracticable” – it may be noted that the DSU does not use the far more rigorous term “impossible” – the Member concerned becomes entitled to a “reasonable period of time” to bring itself into a state of conformity with its WTO obligations.