Dispute settlement mechanisms provided by the association agreements concluded by the European Union with third countries

The rapid development of regional trade liberalization - process which leads to the emergence of institutional mechanisms for interstate cooperation. The Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU - the largest international legal instrument.

Рубрика Государство и право
Вид статья
Язык английский
Дата добавления 26.09.2021
Размер файла 24,6 K

Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже

Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.

An analysis of the recent agreements signed with Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova suggests that the approach to regulating dispute settlement mechanisms is largely uniform. Differences in the details of dispute settlement mechanisms may indicate that the parties are concerned about the likelihood and intensity of disputes.

It is safe to say that there is no universal model for resolving disputes in association (and stabilisation) agreements. However, among the agreements submitted for consideration, the greatest similarity of dispute settlement mechanisms can be traced in the agreements concluded within one policy area and region.

The process of resolving the first Ukraine-EU trade dispute in Ukraine regarding national restrictions on timber exports has been studied. Notably, the European Union, for the first time in its practice, applied the mechanism for resolving trade disputes and initiated the establishment of arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Association Agreement. According to the EU, there have been attempts to resolve the dispute over the export of raw timber through negotiations, but this has not yielded any results. This dispute is the first commercial dispute to be resolved through an arbitration procedure under the Association Agreement. Currently, this dispute is procedurally at the stage of studying the positions of the parties.

References

1. Opinion of the Court of Justice of the EU. (2019, April). Retrieved from http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=213502&pageInd ex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=707133.

2. Cremona, M. Thies, A., Wessel, R.A. (Eds.). (2017). The European Union and International Dispute Settlement. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

3. Garcia Bercero, Ignacio. Dispute Settlement in European Union Free Trade

4. Agreements: Lessons Learned? Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System.P.383-406.Retrievedfrom

5. https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.1093%2Fa cprof%3Aoso%2F9780199206995.003.0017

6. Kostyuchenko, Ya.M. (2016). Peculiarities of contradiction settlement mechanisms in the process of Ukraine's European economic integration. Constitutional State, 21, 250-255.

7. Lyubchenko, Ya.P. (2015). Obligations of Ukraine in the field of alternative ways of resolving legal disputes related to the conclusion of the Association Agreement. Journal of Kyiv University of Law, 4, 370-374.

8. Mazaraki, N.A. (2018). Dispute settlement mechanisms under the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. Law and Society, 5, 212216

9. Muravyov, V. Methods and mechanisms for settling disputes in the European Union Association Agreements. Retrieved from https://instzak.com/index.php/journal/article/view/524/543.

10. Shin, W., & Ahn, D. (2019). Trade gains from legal rulings in the WTO dispute settlement system. World Trade Review, 18(1), 63-79.

11. Davis, C.L., & Morse, J.C. (2018). Protecting trade by legalizing political disputes: Why countries bring cases to the international court of justice. International Studies Quarterly, 62(4), 709-722.

12. Kuenzel, D. J. (2017). WTO dispute determinants. European Economic Review, 91, 157-179.

13. Kucik, J. (2019). How do prior rulings affect future disputes? International Studies Quarterly, 63(4), 1122-1132.

14. Capucio, C. (2018). Legal aspects of the european union participation in the WTO: Understanding subtleties of a delicate liaison. Brazilian Journal of International Law, 15(3), 291-305.

15. Robertson, S.L. (2017). Making education markets through global trade agreements. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(3), 296-308.

16. Idrees, R. Q., Shapiee, R., & Ahamat, H. (2019). Paradigm shift; the emergence of arbitral forum shopping in CPEC investment disputes. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy, 18(3), 136-151.

17. Altamimi, A. (2018). The WTO practice of legality is ensuring transparency for self-enforcing trade. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy, 17(3), 132155.

18. Kostyuchenko, Ya.M. (2019). Legal mechanisms for resolving disputes in the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. European Perspectives, 3, 179-185.

19. Froese, M.D. (2019). Digital trade and dispute settlement in rtas: An evolving standard? Journal of World Trade, 53(5), 783-809.

20. Yildirim, A.B., Tyson Chatagnier, J., Poletti, A., & De Bievre, D. (2018). The internationalization of production and the politics of compliance in WTO disputes. Review of International Organizations, 13(1), 49-75.

21. Holijah, K.,& Rizal, M. (2018). Examining the reverse verification of compensation demand for consumers of products in the free trade era. Journal of Social Sciences Research, 4(12), 395-401.

22. Written position of Ukraine. (2020, March). Retrieved from https://www.google.com.ua/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad =rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjGytrKiovpAhXFoVwKHeTHC1EQFjABegQIAhA B&url=https%3A%2F%2Fme.gov.ua%2FDocuments%2FDownload%3Fid%3D18 2e24fa-fd01-4982-b12e-579da742087e&usg=AOvVaw0dRSQB4SYhf4- gt_M73QT3.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...

Подобные документы

Работы в архивах красиво оформлены согласно требованиям ВУЗов и содержат рисунки, диаграммы, формулы и т.д.
PPT, PPTX и PDF-файлы представлены только в архивах.
Рекомендуем скачать работу.