On 12 December 2018, the Ministry of Finance and the USTR announced their intention to sign a covered agreement with the UK, which would extend the terms, which are almost identical to the EU-covered agreement, to insurers and reinsurers operating in the UK after Brexit. The UK Covered Agreement was signed on 19 December 2018. By applying to all of these agreements, the DSU provides for a coherent and integrated dispute resolution system. This puts an end to the old „GATT the map”, in which each agreement had not only a different set of signatories, but also separate dispute resolution rules.1 Subject to certain exceptions, the DSU applies uniformly to litigation in all WTO agreements. In some cases, there are „special and additional dispute resolution rules and procedures” in the covered agreements (Article 1.2 and Appendix 2 of the AGREEMENT). These are specific rules and procedures „adapted to the specifics of disputes within the framework of a specific agreement.” They take precedence over the rules of the DSU, as there is a difference between the rules and procedures of the DSU and the special and additional rules and procedures (Article 1.2 DSU). Such a „difference” or contradiction between the DSU and the special rules exists only „if the provisions of the DSU and the special or complementary rules and procedures of a covered agreement cannot be understood as complementary” because they are mutually inconsistent, so that compliance with one provision would lead to a violation of the other provision2. if the special additional provisions are given priority and if the DSU rules do not apply. On 22 September 2017, the US Treasury, the USTR and the European Union announced that they had officially signed a covered agreement. The agreement requires states to remove reinsurance guarantees within 5 years or pre-purchase risk conditions. In return, the EU will not impose local presence requirements on US companies operating in the EU and must effectively defer US regulation of group capital for EU-based companies.
(2) Example 2. An insured deposit-taking institution agrees to provide a small business with a $500,000 line of credit, documented by a written agreement. The loan is granted at interest rates within the range of interest rates that the institution offers to similar small businesses in the market, and the loan documents do not indicate that the small business intends or intends to re-lend the borrowed funds.