Search for: "DOES I-XX"
Results 121 - 140
of 402
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Aug 2022, 8:36 am
(Obviously there is GATT Article XX(g), but I don't see how these requirements could satisfy the Article XX chapeau). [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 6:27 am
And finally, of course, as discussed in the last post, Canada could try invoking a GATT Article XX defense, certainly to the Article III:4 claim, but also to the SCM Agreement claim. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 11:26 am
I had thought about going through a full analysis of such a ban (GATT Articles I, III, XI and XX, etc.), but I realized that would be too much for a blog post, and that I was better off focusing on the narrow issue that had occurred to me when I first read about the ban: Would a domestic ban on bluefin tuna imports (implemented pursuant to the CITES ban) constitute a "technical regulation" that is subject to the TBT… [read post]
27 Nov 2014, 12:00 am
Article I of the U.S. [read post]
1 May 2011, 5:10 am
" If I understand interpretation 4 correctly, I think what he is saying is that under this interpretation, the prudential measures provision provides a defense to violations of some provisions (such as GATS Article VI), but does not provide a defense to violations of GATS Article XVI and XVI. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 7:46 am
" But, relying on certain aspects of the jurisprudence, he thinks it can be done in a way that does not violate Article I:1: it would be easy for a WTO Panel to find a tariff conditioned on a non-product related PPM to be inconsistent with the GATT, but this does not mean that it must. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 5:42 am
In fact, I think that the decision of the Panel under the IC exception makes this general proposition clear. [read post]
13 Mar 2018, 7:36 am
I don't have all the answers, but here is a partial explanation. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 5:54 am
Second, I think the non-discrimination standard in paragraph 3(a), borrowed from the Article XX chapeau, is a useful way of rooting out disguised protectionism. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 5:54 am
Second, I think the non-discrimination standard in paragraph 3(a), borrowed from the Article XX chapeau, is a useful way of rooting out disguised protectionism. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 4:08 am
I disagree with both solutions. [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 4:23 am
Article XX(1) of the treaty provides: 1. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 6:56 am
As I noted last week, some Internet providers are forwarding similar information to their subscribers. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 10:00 am
Gardner, 1998, Creative Therapeutics, Inc., at xx. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am
the “class-heading-covers-all” approach: construe the class XX heading list as if it reads “All goods in class XX”. 4. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 5:43 pm
Norway suggested that the EU was required under Article XX to undertake negotiations prior to imposing a unilateral measure. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 4:32 pm
[i] Farm Labor, USDA Econ. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 8:40 am
I always cringe when issuers say something like, “we need $XX,XXX,XXX.XX and we need it in the next 60 days. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 6:38 am
Next week I will look at how OHIM (and other EU IPOs) will have to examine lists of goods/services in applications (whether class headings or not) under a requirement for a Sieckmann-like standard of clarity and precision, and with that also look briefly at whether the AG's IP TRANSLATOR Opinion does or does not speak against the use of genus terms in applications, as suggested in some quarters. [read post]
18 May 2011, 1:30 am
The difficulty is nicely brought out in the account of a robing room conversation with a fellow advocate which Pliny recounts in a letter (Ep I, xx, 14). [read post]
