A comparison of US judicial and NAFTA panel review of trade remedy cases
by Juscelino F. Colares, John W. Bohn
International Journal of Private Law (IJPL), Vol. 1, No. 1/2, 2008

Abstract: Empirical analysis of NAFTA Chapter 19 panel decisions shows that they are far more likely than US courts to overturn US agency decisions despite being bound to apply the same law under the same standard and principles of review that US courts adopt. Also, Chapter 19 panels have produced outcomes more favourable to Canadian importers than have US courts. This outcome illustrates that the facial legal terms of an international agreement may give a misleading impression of how it will actually be implemented, and suggests that greater attention must be paid to how it will be interpreted and by whom.

Online publication date: Fri, 11-Jul-2008

The full text of this article is only available to individual subscribers or to users at subscribing institutions.

 
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.

Pay per view:
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.

Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Private Law (IJPL):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:

Username:        Password:          Forgotten your password?

Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.

If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com