Proportionality and balancing in WTO law: A comparative perspective

Cambridge Review of International Affairs

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 71-92

  Andenas, Mads ^a   Zleptnig, Stefan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85044981153     PISSN: 09557571     EISSN: 1474449X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09557570701232233     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Andenas, Mads, and Kern, Alexander, eds. 2007. The World Trade Organisation and trade in services, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
2. Cass, Deborah Z. 2001. The “constitutionalization” of international trade law: judicial norm-generation as the engine of constitutional development in international trade. European Journal of International Law, 12 (1): 39–75.
3. Craig, Paul. 1999. “ Unreasonableness and proportionality in UK law ”. In The principle of proportionality in the laws of Europe, Edited by: Ellis, Evelyn. 85–106. Oxford: Hart.
4. Craig, Paul. 2003. “ Theory and values in public law: a response ”. In Law and administration in Europe: essays in honour of Carol Harlow, Edited by: Craig, Paul, and Rawlings, Richard. 23–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. De Búrca, Gráinne. 1993. The principle of proportionality and its application in EC law. Yearbook of European Law, 13: 105–150.
6. Desmedt, Axel. 2001. Proportionality in WTO law. Journal of International Economic Law, 4 (3): 441–480.
7. Ehlermann, Claus-Dieter, and Nicolas, Lockhart. 2004. Standard of review in WTO law. Journal of International Economic Law, 7 (3): 491–521.
8. Emiliou, Nicholas. 1996. The principle of proportionality in European law: a comparative study, London: Kluwer.
9. GATT (1990) Panel Report, Thailand—Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, DS10/R–37S/200, 7 November
10. Hilf, Meinhard. 2001. Power, rules and principles: which orientation for WTO/GATT law?. Journal of International Economic Law, 4 (1): 111–130.
11. Hilf, Meinhard, and Goetz J, Goettsche. 2003. “ The relation of economic and non-economic principles in international law ”. In International economic governance and non-economic concerns, Edited by: Griller, Stefan. 5–46. Vienna: Springer.
12. Howse, Robert. 2000. “ Managing the interface between international trade and the regulatory state: what lessons should (and should not) be drawn from the jurisprudence of the United States Dormant Commerce Clause ”. In Regulatory barriers and the principle of non-discrimination in world trade law, world trade forum, Edited by: Cottier, Thomas, and Mavroidis, Petros C. Vol 2, 139–166. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
13. Howse, Robert, and Elisabeth, Türk. 2001. “ The WTO impact on internal regulations: a case study of the Canada—EC asbestos dispute ”. In The EU and the WTO: legal and constitutional issues, Edited by: Búrca, Gráinne, and Scott, Joanne. 283–328. Oxford: Hart.
14. Jackson, John H. 2003. Sovereignty, the WTO and changing fundamentals of international law, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15. Jans, Jan H. 2000. Proportionality revisited. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 27 (3): 239–265.
16. McRae, Donald. 2000. “ GATT Article XX and the WTO Appellate Body ”. In New direction in international economic law: essays in honour of John H Jackson, Edited by: Bronckers, Marco, and Quick, Reinhard. 219–236. The Hague: Kluwer.
17. Neumann, Jan. 2002. Die Koordination des WTO-Rechts mit anderen völkerrechtlichen Ordnungen: Konflikte des materiellen Rechts und Konkurrenzen der Streitbeilegung, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
18. Neumann, Jan, and Elisabeth, Türk. 2003. Necessity revisited: proportionality in World Trade Organization law after Korea—Beef, EC—Asbestos and EC—Sardines. Journal of World Trade, 37 (1): 199–233.
19. Oesch, Matthias. 2004. Standards of review in WTO dispute resolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Ortino, Federico. 2004. Basic legal instruments for the liberalisation of trade: a comparative analysis of EC and WTO law, Oxford: Hart.
21. Ortino, Federico. 2005. From “non-discrimination” to “reasonableness”: a paradigm shift for international economic law?. Jean Monnet Working Paper, 01/05, April
22. Pauwelyn, Joost. 1999. The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures as applied in the first three SPS disputes: EC—Hormones, Australia—Salmon, Japan—Varietals. Journal of International Economic Law, 2 (4): 641–664.
23. Regan, Donald H. 1986. The Supreme Court and state protectionism: making sense of the Dormant Commerce Clause. Michigan Law Review, 84 (6): 1091–1287.
24. Ross, Malcolm. 1998. “ Behind proportionality: the cultural and constitutional context ”. In English Public Law and the Common Law of Europe, Edited by: Andenas, Mads. 83–92. London: Key Haven.
25. Sales, Philip, and Ben, Hooper. 2003. Proportionality and the form of law. Law Quarterly Review, 119 (3): 426–454.
26. Schwarze, Jürgen. 1996. Konvergenz im Verwaltungsrecht der EU-Mitgliedstaaten. Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt, 111 (16): 881–1012.
27. Scott, Joanne. 2004. International trade and environmental governance: relating rules (and standards) in the EU and WTO. European Journal of International Law, 15 (2): 307–354.
28. Snell, Jukka. 2002. Goods and services in EC law: a study of the relationship between the freedoms, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Trachtman, Joel. 1999. The domain of dispute resolution. Harvard International Law Journal, 40 (2): 333–377.
30. WTO (1996) AB Report, United States—Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline (US—Gasoline), WT/DS2/AB/R, 20 May
31. WTO (1997) Panel Report, European Communities—Measures Affecting Meat and Meat Products (EC—Hormones), WT/DS26/R, 18 August
32. WTO (1998a) AB Report, European Communities—Measures Affecting Meat and Meat Products (EC—Hormones), WT/DS48/AB/R, 13 February
33. WTO (1998b) AB Report, United States—Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (US—Shrimp), WT/DS58/AB/R, 6 November
34. WTO (1998c) AB Report, Australia—Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon (Australia—Salmon), WT/DS18/AB/R, 6 November
35. WTO (2000) Panel Report, Canada—Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Products (Canada—Pharmaceutical Patents), WT/DS114/R, 7 April
36. WTO (2001a) AB, Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products (EC—Asbestos), WT/DS135/AB/R, 5 April
37. WTO (2001b) AB Report, Korea—Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef (Korea—Beef), WT/DS161/AB/R, 10 January
38. WTO (2002a) Panel Report, European Communities—Trade Description of Sardines (EC—Sardines), WT/DS231/R, 29 May
39. WTO (2002b) AB Report, European Communities—Trade Description of Sardines (EC—Sardines), WT/DS231/AB/R, 23 October
40. WTO (2002c) ‘Note by the Secretariat ‘GATT/WTO dispute settlement practice relating to GATT Article XX, Paragraphs (b), (d) and (g)”, WT/CTE/W/203, 8 March
41. WTO (2003) AB Report, Japan—Affecting the Importation of Apples (Japan—Apples), WT/DS245/AB/R, 10 December
42. WTO (2005a) AB Report, United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (US—Gambling), WT/DS285/AB/R, 7 April
43. WTO (2005b) AB Report, Dominican Republic—Measures Affecting the Importation and Internal Sale of Cigarettes (Dominican Republic—Cigarettes), WT/DS302/AB/R, 25 April
44. Zleptnig, Stefan. 2002. The standard of review in WTO law: an analysis of law, legitimacy and the distribution of legal and political authority. European Business Law Review, 13 (5): 427–457.