Competing Jurisdictions between MERCOSUR and WTO

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record LAVRANOS, Nikolaos VIELLIARD, Nicolas 2009-09-18T16:12:27Z 2009-09-18T16:12:27Z 2008
dc.identifier.citation The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 2008, 7, 2, 205-234 en
dc.description.abstract The wider issues raised by the Brazilian Tyres case are discussed in this contribution. Regarding the institutional aspects, this case examines the difficulties between regional dispute settlement systems and the global WTO dispute settlement system. In particular, the WTO Appellate Body showed no deference towards the prior report of the MERCOSUR Arbitral Tribunal. Indeed, the WTO Appellate Body is espousing a supremacy of WTO law - not only vis-à-vis regional dispute settlement bodies, but also regarding WTO panels. It is argued that this attitude is not sustainable in the light of the increasing proliferation of international courts and tribunals, which inevitably results into disputes being adjudicated by different courts and tribunals at different levels. Regarding the substantive aspects, this case is a prime example of the difficulties of balancing non-trade interests and trade interests. At the end, trade interests superseded the nontrade interests. It is argued that the way Article XX GATT has been interpreted and applied by the WTO Appellate Body leaves states insufficient room to address urgent environmental and health problems by restricting trade. It is argued that in this case Brazil's non-trade interests should have been given preference over the trade interests of the EC and Uruguay. en
dc.language.iso en en
dc.title Competing Jurisdictions between MERCOSUR and WTO en
dc.type Article en
eui.subscribe.skip true

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record