Suchergebnisse

"Are the limitations imposed on World Trade Organization (WTO) members' right to regulate efficient? This is a question that is only scarcely, if ever, analysed in existing literature. Boris Rigod aims to provide an answer to this fundamental concern. Using the tools of economic analysis and in particular the concept of economic efficiency as a benchmark, the author states that domestic regulatory measures should only be subject to scrutiny by WTO bodies when they cause negative international externalities through terms of trade manipulations. He then suggests that WTO law, applied by the WTO judiciary can prevent WTO members from attaining optimal levels of regulation. By applying a law and economics methodology, Rigod provides an innovative solution to the problem of how to reconcile members' regulatory autonomy and WTO rules as well as offering a novel analytical framework for assessing domestic regulations in the light of WTO law"--

"Are the limitations imposed on World Trade Organization (WTO) members' right to regulate efficient? This is a question that is only scarcely, if ever, analysed in existing literature. Boris Rigod aims to provide an answer to this fundamental concern. Using the tools of economic analysis and in particular the concept of economic efficiency as a benchmark, the author states that domestic regulatory measures should only be subject to scrutiny by WTO bodies when they cause negative international externalities through terms of trade manipulations. He then suggests that WTO law, applied by the WTO judiciary can prevent WTO members from attaining optimal levels of regulation. By applying a law and economics methodology, Rigod provides an innovative solution to the problem of how to reconcile members' regulatory autonomy and WTO rules as well as offering a novel analytical framework for assessing domestic regulations in the light of WTO law"--

Are the limitations imposed on World Trade Organization (WTO) members' right to regulate efficient? This is a question that is only scarcely, if ever, analysed in existing literature. Boris Rigod aims to provide an answer to this fundamental concern. Using the tools of economic analysis and in particular the concept of economic efficiency as a benchmark, the author states that domestic regulatory measures should only be subject to scrutiny by WTO bodies when they cause negative international externalities through terms of trade manipulations. He then suggests that WTO law, applied by the WTO judiciary can prevent WTO members from attaining optimal levels of regulation. By applying a law and economics methodology, Rigod provides an innovative solution to the problem of how to reconcile members' regulatory autonomy and WTO rules as well as offering a novel analytical framework for assessing domestic regulations in the light of WTO law

The main objective of WTO Law is to accommodate individual's right in order to obtain better benefit of international trade. However, when a government violates WTO Law, it is therefore causing deprivation of individual right itself. Direct effect seems to be a feasible doctrine to provide a judicial protection for individual, in order to rebalance the right that is violated. Nevertheless, this doctrine is intractable to imply. This article discuss the polemic of giving direct effect of WTO Law and DSB Decision to domestic law to provide judicial protection for individual who becomes victim of WTO violation conducted by government

A study prepared for the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE) The problem of increasing imports of subsidised renewable electricity from neighboring countries and Member States of the EU, undermining level playing fields for traditional hydropower in Switzerland, can be addressed by means of preferential taxation of electricity produced by means of renewable energy. Both under WTO law and the rules of the 1972 Free Trade Agreement, distinctions may be drawn on the basis of non-product related production and process methods, provided the same rules apply to domestic and imported electricity produced with similar methods. Differential taxation can be implemented on the basis of certificates of origin (CO) which need to be made available alike to domestic and foreign producers. A privilege exclusively granted to domestic producers cannot be lawfully sustained. Also, quantitative restrictions of imports cannot be properly justified. The study recommends adopting a system comparable to the UK model of renewable electricity exemption scheme, in place since 2001. It has not been challenged under EU law or under WTO law. To the extent that considerations of industrial policy dominate the motivation, rather than the promotion of green electricity, measures could be adopted on the basis of countervailing duties, offsetting foreign subsidies granted. Also, recourse to safeguard measures, albeit limited in time, can be contemplated. As Switzerland has little experience in taking recourse to trade remedies, a proper methodology taking into account WTO law would need to be developed and communicated in advance. Finally, efforts should be made to address the issue in negotiations with the European Union and Member States. Both unilateral measures relating to differential taxation as well as trade remedies may be used as an argument to bring about a settlement with exporting countries of subsidised electricity.

The EC-Seal Products case raises a number of interesting issues for scholars researching in the broad area of risk regulation. This symposium addresses a selection of them through innovative, analytical contributions whose goals are to test central assumptions and question the logic of the findings and to bring fresh solutions to problems faced by the Appellate Body and the panel. In keeping with this analytical focus, this introduction to the symposium will not just present a summary of the key legal findings. Instead, it attempts to draw some further conclusions from the different contributions, to place the contributions in their broader legal context and to make connections between aspects (not) decided in Seals and scholarship on risk regulation, more generally.

"Both in WTO law and EU law there is a dichotomy between liberalisation based on market access and targeting domestic regulation. Consequently, both regimes share the problem of distinguishing national measures impairing market access and those that do not have such effect. Looking at the provision of services, a cornerstone of EU substantive law, in the EU and the WTO this book offers a comprehensive evaluation of the current legal status quo on transnational services provision on a global level. Based on thorough analysis of both EU and WTO law, policymakers are provided with concrete proposals for fostering the consistency and effectiveness of the current regime. A final chapter discusses possible approaches to regulation such as home state rule, host state rule and mutual recognition from a comparative perspective. Written by a highly respected author team, this is essential reading for EU internal market specialists and WTO law scholars alike"--. "Services liberalization is just as much a hot potato within the European Union as it is within the WTO. In this work Markus Klamert offers a stimulating examination of how the EU and the WTO have coped with market liberalization and with the development of regulatory standards. His analysis almost recalls the perceived relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States (two nations divided by a common language). While the EU and WTO regimes display manifest differences, the language of market access, discrimination, justifi cation and harmonization can be seen as being hewn from the same roots. This work seeks to lift the veil of ignorance about these similarities and to encourage more cross-fertilization than has hitherto occurred

In this Master Thesis the influence of WTO law within the EU legal order was analyzed, particularly the direct effect of WTO provisions which is denied by the CJEU. Discussions why directly effective WTO law is denied are still ongoing and the analysis of the case law of the CJEU reveals that double standards are applied for WTO law. As the research showed, even though the direct effect of WTO provisions is denied, WTO law undoubtedly has an impact within the EU legal system. It is seen from the standpoint of two conditions when it is possible to rely on WTO rules in order to review the validity of EU legislation and through the consistent interpretation. The statement was presented that rather limited interpretation on the direct effect of WTO law encouraged to seek sufficiently sturdy effect by using the alternatives for direct effect. However, as it was reveal in this Master Thesis, WTO provisions are still avoided and infringed by EU legislative institutions as well as the CJEU. The first chapter of this Master Thesis examines two concepts – direct effect and direct applicability. The issue of equalization of these concepts regarding WTO law is highlighted. The second chapter analyses the grounds and reveals both legal and political reasons why directly effective WTO law is denied within the EU legal system. The third chapter confirms that under certain conditions it is possible to rely on WTO provisions in order to review the lawfulness of EU acts. The last, fourth, chapter highlights the importance of consistent EU measures adoption and interpretation with WTO law.

In this Master Thesis the influence of WTO law within the EU legal order was analyzed, particularly the direct effect of WTO provisions which is denied by the CJEU. Discussions why directly effective WTO law is denied are still ongoing and the analysis of the case law of the CJEU reveals that double standards are applied for WTO law. As the research showed, even though the direct effect of WTO provisions is denied, WTO law undoubtedly has an impact within the EU legal system. It is seen from the standpoint of two conditions when it is possible to rely on WTO rules in order to review the validity of EU legislation and through the consistent interpretation. The statement was presented that rather limited interpretation on the direct effect of WTO law encouraged to seek sufficiently sturdy effect by using the alternatives for direct effect. However, as it was reveal in this Master Thesis, WTO provisions are still avoided and infringed by EU legislative institutions as well as the CJEU. The first chapter of this Master Thesis examines two concepts – direct effect and direct applicability. The issue of equalization of these concepts regarding WTO law is highlighted. The second chapter analyses the grounds and reveals both legal and political reasons why directly effective WTO law is denied within the EU legal system. The third chapter confirms that under certain conditions it is possible to rely on WTO provisions in order to review the lawfulness of EU acts. The last, fourth, chapter highlights the importance of consistent EU measures adoption and interpretation with WTO law.