Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Green Paper on Europe's Trade Defence Instruments Calls for Transparency: Can the Introduction of APO Be an Issue under Discussion?

The Green Paper on Europe's Trade Defence Instruments Calls for Transparency: Can the... ARTICLE * I. INTRODUCTION On 6 December 2006, EU Commissioner for Trade Peter Mandelson launched a call for reform of the Trade Defence Instruments (TDIs) within the European framework by the publication of a Green Paper providing for a public consultation process. Substantial matters within the TDIs are, of course, the anti-dumping (AD) rules, which in Europe are regulated by Council Regulation No. 384/961 (`The Basic Regulation'). This article focuses on the current AD proceeding rules applicable to confidentiality and foresees if and how, under the current winds of reform, confidentiality rules may be subject to modification. One reason behind the public consultation on TDI's launched by Commissioner Mandelson is that many stakeholders and interested parties in the recent past complained of the lack of transparency of the current AD rules as interpreted and applied by the European Commission and the Council of the European Union. Such lack of transparency in the AD procedures has been recently represented: (i) in the Eurocoton case judgment2 where ECJ has ruled how in antidumping investigation: ` . . . when the Council decides not to adopt a proposal for a regulation imposing definitive anti-dumping duties, it should provide an adequate statement http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Global Trade and Customs Journal Kluwer Law International

The Green Paper on Europe's Trade Defence Instruments Calls for Transparency: Can the Introduction of APO Be an Issue under Discussion?

Global Trade and Customs Journal , Volume 3 (2) – Feb 1, 2008

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/the-green-paper-on-europe-s-trade-defence-instruments-calls-for-fctRa378Kw

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer Law International
ISSN
1569-755X
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ARTICLE * I. INTRODUCTION On 6 December 2006, EU Commissioner for Trade Peter Mandelson launched a call for reform of the Trade Defence Instruments (TDIs) within the European framework by the publication of a Green Paper providing for a public consultation process. Substantial matters within the TDIs are, of course, the anti-dumping (AD) rules, which in Europe are regulated by Council Regulation No. 384/961 (`The Basic Regulation'). This article focuses on the current AD proceeding rules applicable to confidentiality and foresees if and how, under the current winds of reform, confidentiality rules may be subject to modification. One reason behind the public consultation on TDI's launched by Commissioner Mandelson is that many stakeholders and interested parties in the recent past complained of the lack of transparency of the current AD rules as interpreted and applied by the European Commission and the Council of the European Union. Such lack of transparency in the AD procedures has been recently represented: (i) in the Eurocoton case judgment2 where ECJ has ruled how in antidumping investigation: ` . . . when the Council decides not to adopt a proposal for a regulation imposing definitive anti-dumping duties, it should provide an adequate statement

Journal

Global Trade and Customs JournalKluwer Law International

Published: Feb 1, 2008

There are no references for this article.