Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Law

Measures With Multiple Purposes: Puzzles From Ec-Seal Products, Donald H. Regan Jun 2015

Measures With Multiple Purposes: Puzzles From Ec-Seal Products, Donald H. Regan

Articles

European Communities—Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products is the first case in which the dispute system of the World Trade Organization (WTO) has wrestled with a regulation that pursued multiple conflicting, legitimate purposes. (I will explain later why Brazil—Retreaded Tyres is not such a case.) This generates puzzles about applying the definition of a “technical regulation” to complex measures; about whether an exception to a ban can be justified by a purpose different from that of the ban; and about how to apply “less restrictive alternative” analysis to measures with multiple goals. The first of ...


United States--Certain Measures Affecting Imports Of Poultry From China: The Fascinating Case That Wasn't, Donald H. Regan Jan 2012

United States--Certain Measures Affecting Imports Of Poultry From China: The Fascinating Case That Wasn't, Donald H. Regan

Articles

US–Poultry (China) was the first Panel decision dealing with an origin-specific SPS measure, or with what the United States referred to as an ‘equivalence regime’. More specifically, it was the first instance in which the basis for the challenged measure was the claimed inability of the complainant country to enforce its own food-safety rules. Unfortunately, as the litigation developed, the very interesting novel issues raised by such a measure were not discussed. This essay discusses those novel issues – in particular, what sort of scientific justification or risk assessment should be required for a measure like this, and what SPS ...


The Meaning Of 'Necessary' In Gatt Article Xx And Gats Article Xiv: The Myth Of Cost-Benefit Balancing, Donald H. Regan Jan 2007

The Meaning Of 'Necessary' In Gatt Article Xx And Gats Article Xiv: The Myth Of Cost-Benefit Balancing, Donald H. Regan

Articles

Conventional wisdom tells us that in Korea–Beef, the Appellate Body interpreted the word ‘necessary’ in GATT Article XX to require a cost–benefit balancing test. The Appellate Body is supposed to have applied this test also in EC–Asbestos, US–Gambling (involving GATS Article XIV), and Dominican Republic–Cigarettes. In this article I demonstrate, by detailed analysis of the opinions, that the Appellate Body has never engaged in such balancing. They have stated the balancing test, but in every case they have also stated the principle that Members get to choose their own level of protection, which is logically ...


A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan Jan 2007

A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan

Articles

In US-Gambling, the Appellate Body held that an origin-neutral prohibition on remote gambling (which is how they mostly viewed the United States law) was "in effect" a "zero-quota", and that such a "zero-quota" violated GATS Article XVI:2. That holding has been widely criticized, especially for what critics refer to as the Appellate Body's "effects test". This article argues that the Appellate Body's "in effect" analysis is not an "effects test" and is not the real problem. The real mistake is regarding a so-called "zero-quota" as a quota under Article XVI. That is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning ...


Do World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Reports Affect The Obligations Of Non-Parties? -- Response To Mcnelis, Donald H. Regan Jan 2003

Do World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Reports Affect The Obligations Of Non-Parties? -- Response To Mcnelis, Donald H. Regan

Articles

In the June 2003 issue of this Journal, Natalie McNelis argued that when a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute is settled by a Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) report, even Members who are not parties to the dispute have an obligation to conform their behaviour to legal principles laid down in the report. 1 Although I am generally sympathetic to McNeis's conclusion-and although I think she does a great service by directing our attention to the question of how Members, as opposed to later tribunals, should respond to DSB reports-I think her argument cannot stand as she presents it. After ...


Further Thoughts On The Role Of Regulatory Purpose Under Article Iii Of The General Agreement On Tariffs And Trade: A Tribute To Bob Hudec, Donald H. Regan Jan 2003

Further Thoughts On The Role Of Regulatory Purpose Under Article Iii Of The General Agreement On Tariffs And Trade: A Tribute To Bob Hudec, Donald H. Regan

Articles

My topic in this article is the role of regulatory purpose under Article III of the GATT, and I regard Bob [Hudec] as the patron saint of efforts to establish the relevance of purpose. His famous "Requiem for an 'Aims and Effects' Test" may have been called a requiem, but it was reluctant and sceptical. Bob thought dispute settlement tribunals ought to consider the regulator's purpose, and he thought they would do so, whatever they said. As decisions on Article III accumulate, we are in the process of learning that he was right on both counts.


Regulatory Purpose And 'Like Products' In Article Iii:4 Of The Gatt (With Additional Remarks On Article Ii:2), Donald H. Regan Jan 2002

Regulatory Purpose And 'Like Products' In Article Iii:4 Of The Gatt (With Additional Remarks On Article Ii:2), Donald H. Regan

Articles

In European Communities-Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products (EC-Asbestos) the Appellate Body has told us that (1) in interpreting Article 111:4 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), we must take explicit account of the policy in Article 111:1 that measures should not be applied "so as to afford protection to domestic production" [hereafter just "so as to afford protection"]. In Chile--Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (Chile--Alcohol) the Appellate Body has told us that (2) in deciding whether a measure is applied "so as to afford protection", we must consider "the purposes or objectives of a Member ...


The Product/Process Distinction - An Illusory Basis For Disciplining 'Unilateralism' In Trade Policy, Robert L. Howse, Donald H. Regan Jan 2000

The Product/Process Distinction - An Illusory Basis For Disciplining 'Unilateralism' In Trade Policy, Robert L. Howse, Donald H. Regan

Articles

It has become conventional wisdom that internal regulations that distinguish between products on the basis of their production method are GATT-illegal, where applied to restrict imports (although possibly some such measures might be justified as 'exceptions' under Article XX). The aim of this article is to challenge this conventional wisdom, both from a jurisprudential and a policy perspective. First, we argue there is no real support in the text and jurisprudence of the GATT for the product/process distinction. The notion developed in the unadopted Tuna/Dolphin cases that processed-based measures are somehow excluded from the coverage of Article III ...