首页> 外文期刊>Journal of International Economic Law >In Search of Relevant Discretion: The Role of the Mandatory/Discretionary Distinction in WTO Law
【24h】

In Search of Relevant Discretion: The Role of the Mandatory/Discretionary Distinction in WTO Law

机译:寻找相关的自由裁量权:强制/自由裁量区别在WTO法律中的作用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

When deciding whether a general rule is inconsistent with the law of the World Trade Organization (WTO), a distinction has been drawn between rules that ‘mandate’ violations of WTO law, and rules that provide the ‘discretion’ to violate WTO law. Measures that include a discretionary element have, under the ‘mandatory/discretionary distinction’, been saved from a finding that they are ‘as such’ WTO-inconsistent. This article explores how the mandatory/discretionary distinction has been developed and applied in WTO law. It also questions the sharp divide between ‘mandatory’ and ‘discretionary’ measures that is implied by the distinction; and it argues that discretion comes in different forms, which should not all have the same relevance when assessing the WTO-consistency of rules. The article proposes a basic taxonomy involving three different types of discretion: the discretion to adopt or withdraw rules; the discretion to apply or not apply rules; and the discretion to select meaning through the interpretation and application of rules. For each category, the article offers views on the relevance of that type of discretion in examining the WTO-consistency of a general rule.
机译:在确定一般规则是否与世界贸易组织(WTO)的法律相抵触时,在“强制”违反WTO法律的规则与提供“酌处权”违反WTO法律的规则之间进行了区分。根据“强制性/自由裁量性区别”,包含裁量权的措施已从发现其“与世贸组织本身不一致”的发现中被删除。本文探讨了强制性/裁量性区别如何在WTO法律中得到发展和应用。它还质疑这种区分所隐含的“强制性”措施与“酌处性”措施之间的巨大分歧;它认为自由裁量权有不同的形式,在评估WTO规则的一致性时,它们不应具有相同的相关性。本文提出了一种基本分类法,涉及三种不同类型的自由裁量权:采用或撤消规则的自由裁量权;适用或不适用规则的酌处权;以及通过解释和应用规则选择含义的自由裁量权。对于每种类别,本文都提供了关于此类酌处权在检查一般规则的WTO一致性方面的相关性的观点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号