General exceptions under the GATS - A Legal Commentary on Article XIV GATS

Panos Delimatsis, Léo Gargne
{"title":"General exceptions under the GATS - A Legal Commentary on Article XIV GATS","authors":"Panos Delimatsis, Léo Gargne","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3757464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The general and specific obligations undertaken under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) by Members in relation to non-discrimination and market access and a level playing field in services, may under certain circumstances, considerably restrict the pursuit of equally legitimate, non-economic policy goals and competing public interests and values, such as public health, public order, safety, public morals or the environment. WTO law seeks to establish a proper balance between these different policy goals, notably through general exceptions applicable to all provisions and existing commitments under an agreement. Art. XIV GATS follows the model of Art. XX GATT 1994, and given that the case law relating to Art. XIV GATS is still in its infant stage, WTO adjudicating bodies have recourse to precedents developed under Art. XX GATT 1994, albeit taking into account the different structure and flexibility of the GATS and commitments made by Members. Nonetheless, the experience in case law is still limited and it is difficult to anticipate future needs or developments in appropriately shaping and construing Art. XIV GATS. Any such effort to interpret Art. XIV should bear in mind that it is arguably only when Members’ regulatory concerns are accommodated that they will be willing to engage in enhanced commitments to liberalize trade. Both the requirement of necessity or proportionality and the function of the chapeau protect Members from excessive and abusive recourse to exemptions for purely protectionist or rent-seeking reasons of a particular domestic service industry.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Economic Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3757464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The general and specific obligations undertaken under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) by Members in relation to non-discrimination and market access and a level playing field in services, may under certain circumstances, considerably restrict the pursuit of equally legitimate, non-economic policy goals and competing public interests and values, such as public health, public order, safety, public morals or the environment. WTO law seeks to establish a proper balance between these different policy goals, notably through general exceptions applicable to all provisions and existing commitments under an agreement. Art. XIV GATS follows the model of Art. XX GATT 1994, and given that the case law relating to Art. XIV GATS is still in its infant stage, WTO adjudicating bodies have recourse to precedents developed under Art. XX GATT 1994, albeit taking into account the different structure and flexibility of the GATS and commitments made by Members. Nonetheless, the experience in case law is still limited and it is difficult to anticipate future needs or developments in appropriately shaping and construing Art. XIV GATS. Any such effort to interpret Art. XIV should bear in mind that it is arguably only when Members’ regulatory concerns are accommodated that they will be willing to engage in enhanced commitments to liberalize trade. Both the requirement of necessity or proportionality and the function of the chapeau protect Members from excessive and abusive recourse to exemptions for purely protectionist or rent-seeking reasons of a particular domestic service industry.
GATS下的一般例外-对GATS第14条的法律评论
在某些情况下,各成员根据《服务贸易总协定》(GATS)就服务领域的非歧视、市场准入和公平竞争环境所承担的一般和具体义务,可能在很大程度上限制追求同样合法的非经济政策目标和相互竞争的公共利益和价值观,例如公共卫生、公共秩序、安全、公共道德或环境。世贸组织法律寻求在这些不同的政策目标之间建立适当的平衡,特别是通过适用于协定下所有规定和现有承诺的一般例外。艺术。《服务贸易总协定》遵循《贸易总协定》的模式。第XX条GATT 1994,并考虑到与第19条有关的判例法。由于服务贸易总协定仍处于初级阶段,世贸组织裁决机构可以求助于根据第14条制定的先例。XX GATT 1994,尽管考虑到GATS的不同结构和灵活性以及成员作出的承诺。然而,判例法的经验仍然有限,很难预测未来在适当塑造和构建艺术方面的需求或发展。十四门。任何解释艺术的努力。XIV应牢记,只有当成员的监管关切得到满足时,他们才会愿意加强对贸易自由化的承诺。必要性或相称性的要求和开头条款的功能都保护各成员避免出于纯粹的保护主义或寻租原因而过度和滥用豁免。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信