{"title":"基于公共道德、公共秩序和公共政策的被占领领土和对WTO和欧盟规则的例外","authors":"Jonathan D. C. Turner, T. Howard","doi":"10.54648/eulr2023035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses whether restrictions on trade with occupied territories imposed by national or sub-national authorities are permitted under exceptions to WTO and EU free trade rules on grounds of public morality, public order or public policy. The relevant provisions have a common origin and similarities in their terms. However, our analysis finds significant differences in their interpretation and application.\nRestrictions on trade with occupied territories are unlikely to be permitted on these grounds under WTO rules unless there is a strong justification for the restrictions in all the circumstances and they do not discriminate between different territories where relevant conditions are similar. By contrast, such restrictions are unlikely to be permitted under EU law if adopted unilaterally by an EU member state or sub-national authority.\nThe different approaches and potentially different outcomes reflect the different priorities of the WTO and the EU. The primary objective of the WTO is to remove barriers and discrimination in international trade in a diverse global economy in which countries with differing values and alliances participate. By contrast, the highest priority of the EU is the integration of the economies and societies of its member states.\nOccupied territories, WTO, EU, free trade, exceptions, public morality, public order, public policy, discrimination, common commercial policy","PeriodicalId":53431,"journal":{"name":"European Business Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Occupied Territories and the Exceptions to WTO and EU Rules on grounds of Public Morality, Public Order and Public Policy\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan D. C. Turner, T. Howard\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eulr2023035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses whether restrictions on trade with occupied territories imposed by national or sub-national authorities are permitted under exceptions to WTO and EU free trade rules on grounds of public morality, public order or public policy. The relevant provisions have a common origin and similarities in their terms. However, our analysis finds significant differences in their interpretation and application.\\nRestrictions on trade with occupied territories are unlikely to be permitted on these grounds under WTO rules unless there is a strong justification for the restrictions in all the circumstances and they do not discriminate between different territories where relevant conditions are similar. By contrast, such restrictions are unlikely to be permitted under EU law if adopted unilaterally by an EU member state or sub-national authority.\\nThe different approaches and potentially different outcomes reflect the different priorities of the WTO and the EU. The primary objective of the WTO is to remove barriers and discrimination in international trade in a diverse global economy in which countries with differing values and alliances participate. By contrast, the highest priority of the EU is the integration of the economies and societies of its member states.\\nOccupied territories, WTO, EU, free trade, exceptions, public morality, public order, public policy, discrimination, common commercial policy\",\"PeriodicalId\":53431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2023035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2023035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Occupied Territories and the Exceptions to WTO and EU Rules on grounds of Public Morality, Public Order and Public Policy
This article discusses whether restrictions on trade with occupied territories imposed by national or sub-national authorities are permitted under exceptions to WTO and EU free trade rules on grounds of public morality, public order or public policy. The relevant provisions have a common origin and similarities in their terms. However, our analysis finds significant differences in their interpretation and application.
Restrictions on trade with occupied territories are unlikely to be permitted on these grounds under WTO rules unless there is a strong justification for the restrictions in all the circumstances and they do not discriminate between different territories where relevant conditions are similar. By contrast, such restrictions are unlikely to be permitted under EU law if adopted unilaterally by an EU member state or sub-national authority.
The different approaches and potentially different outcomes reflect the different priorities of the WTO and the EU. The primary objective of the WTO is to remove barriers and discrimination in international trade in a diverse global economy in which countries with differing values and alliances participate. By contrast, the highest priority of the EU is the integration of the economies and societies of its member states.
Occupied territories, WTO, EU, free trade, exceptions, public morality, public order, public policy, discrimination, common commercial policy
期刊介绍:
The mission of the European Business Law Review is to provide a forum for analysis and discussion of business law, including European Union law and the laws of the Member States and other European countries, as well as legal frameworks and issues in international and comparative contexts. The Review moves freely over the boundaries that divide the law, and covers business law, broadly defined, in public or private law, domestic, European or international law. Our topics of interest include commercial, financial, corporate, private and regulatory laws with a broadly business dimension. The Review offers current, authoritative scholarship on a wide range of issues and developments, featuring contributors providing an international as well as a European perspective. The Review is an invaluable source of current scholarship, information, practical analysis, and expert guidance for all practising lawyers, advisers, and scholars dealing with European business law on a regular basis. The Review has over 25 years established the highest scholarly standards. It distinguishes itself as open-minded, embracing interests that appeal to the scholarly, practitioner and policy-making spheres. It practices strict routines of peer review. The Review imposes no word limit on submissions, subject to the appropriateness of the word length to the subject under discussion.