Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCANTORE, Carlo Maria
dc.contributor.authorMAVROIDIS, Petros C.
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-04T16:34:50Z
dc.date.available2014-12-04T16:34:50Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationEuropean journal of risk regulation, 2013, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 268-270
dc.identifier.issn1867-299X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/33711
dc.description.abstractFollowing years of silence after EC-Sardines1, three cases were adjudicated by Panels under the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) in 2011 : US Clove Cigarettes, US-Tuna II (Mexico), and US-COOL. These three cases dealt with key provisions of the Agreement, but the Panels adopted irreconcilable approaches. All three decisions were appealed before the Appeliate Body (AB), but even the latter failed to apply a coherent methodology to adjudicate similar disputes. In Section II, we provide a brief account of the facts and the outcomes of the cases, whereas, in Section III we discuss the methodology applied by the WTO judiciary in the three cases.
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean journal of risk regulation
dc.titleSultans of swing? : the emerging WTO case law on TBT
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.volume4
dc.identifier.startpage268
dc.identifier.endpage270
dc.identifier.issue2


Files associated with this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record