在欧盟法院提起贸易保护措施诉讼的障碍

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of World Trade Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.54648/trad2020039
A. Moroni, Bregt Natens, A. Willems
{"title":"在欧盟法院提起贸易保护措施诉讼的障碍","authors":"A. Moroni, Bregt Natens, A. Willems","doi":"10.54648/trad2020039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"EU institutions often use trade defence measures to shield EU industries from competition. These measures come at the expense of importers and foreign exporting producers. The most feasible avenue for importers and exporting producers to obtain a practicable remedy is by challenging an adverse trade defence measure before the EU Courts. However, the EU Courts have adopted a strict approach to challenges to trade defence measures, which increasingly requires sophisticated litigation strategies to overcome multiple hurdles. First, the standing requirements to have a case admitted are stringent. Second, the burden to prove substantive or procedural errors in trade defence proceedings is high. Third, even if a case is successful, the EU Courts recognize that the EU institutions almost unbridled discretion in implementing judgments. These hurdles to litigating trade defence measures risk curtailing the role of the EU Courts in limiting the Commission’s powers in a way that maintains proper checks and balances. They also put on applicants the task to develop tools and arguments to address and overcome these hurdles.","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hurdles to Litigating Trade Defence Measures Before the EU Courts\",\"authors\":\"A. Moroni, Bregt Natens, A. Willems\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/trad2020039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"EU institutions often use trade defence measures to shield EU industries from competition. These measures come at the expense of importers and foreign exporting producers. The most feasible avenue for importers and exporting producers to obtain a practicable remedy is by challenging an adverse trade defence measure before the EU Courts. However, the EU Courts have adopted a strict approach to challenges to trade defence measures, which increasingly requires sophisticated litigation strategies to overcome multiple hurdles. First, the standing requirements to have a case admitted are stringent. Second, the burden to prove substantive or procedural errors in trade defence proceedings is high. Third, even if a case is successful, the EU Courts recognize that the EU institutions almost unbridled discretion in implementing judgments. These hurdles to litigating trade defence measures risk curtailing the role of the EU Courts in limiting the Commission’s powers in a way that maintains proper checks and balances. They also put on applicants the task to develop tools and arguments to address and overcome these hurdles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2020039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2020039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧盟机构经常使用贸易保护措施来保护欧盟产业免受竞争。这些措施是以进口商和外国出口生产商的利益为代价的。进出口生产商获得切实可行的补救措施的最可行途径是向欧盟法院挑战不利的贸易防御措施。然而,欧盟法院对贸易保护措施的挑战采取了严格的做法,这越来越需要复杂的诉讼策略来克服多重障碍。首先,受理案件的资格要求是严格的。其次,在贸易抗辩程序中证明实质性或程序性错误的负担很高。第三,即使案件成功,欧盟法院也承认欧盟机构在执行判决时几乎不受约束的自由裁量权。对贸易保护措施提起诉讼的这些障碍,可能会削弱欧盟法院在限制欧盟委员会权力、维持适当制衡方面的作用。他们还要求申请人开发工具和论据来解决和克服这些障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hurdles to Litigating Trade Defence Measures Before the EU Courts
EU institutions often use trade defence measures to shield EU industries from competition. These measures come at the expense of importers and foreign exporting producers. The most feasible avenue for importers and exporting producers to obtain a practicable remedy is by challenging an adverse trade defence measure before the EU Courts. However, the EU Courts have adopted a strict approach to challenges to trade defence measures, which increasingly requires sophisticated litigation strategies to overcome multiple hurdles. First, the standing requirements to have a case admitted are stringent. Second, the burden to prove substantive or procedural errors in trade defence proceedings is high. Third, even if a case is successful, the EU Courts recognize that the EU institutions almost unbridled discretion in implementing judgments. These hurdles to litigating trade defence measures risk curtailing the role of the EU Courts in limiting the Commission’s powers in a way that maintains proper checks and balances. They also put on applicants the task to develop tools and arguments to address and overcome these hurdles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
期刊最新文献
Rethinking Test Data Protection in China-US Trade War: Integrating Empirical and Normative Analysis The WTO and Using Digital Economy Technologies: Surviving the Race With Preferential Trade Agreements A Tale of Too Little: Anti-dumping Tariff Between SAFTA Contracting Parties Game Analysis of Different Source Disclosure Model for Genetic Resources and Implications for China Improving Export Credit Agency Impact Through Full Faith and Credit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1