6) Referências Bibliográficas
ARNULL, Anthony. European Union and its Court of Justice, The. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. 593 p.
CAPALDO, Giuliana Ziccardi. The pillars of global law. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, 2008. 429 p.
DI GIANNI, Fabrizio, ANTONINI, Renato. DSB decisions and direct effect of WTO law: Should EC courts be more flexible when the flexibility of the WTO system has come to an end. 40 Journal of World Trade. p. 777-793, 2006. Disponível em < http://www.vanbaelbellis.com/files/WTO-dir%20effect-110904A.pdf> . Acesso em 02 ago 2009.
HARTLEY, Trevor C. The foundations of European Community law: an introduction to the constitutional and administrative law of the European Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 6. Ed. 472 p.
QUADROS, Fausto de. Direito da União Europeia. Coimbra: Livraria Almedina, 2004. 606 p.
KELSEN, Hans. Pure Theory of law. Clark: The Lawbook Exchange Ltda, 2005. 356 p.
KUILWIJK, Kees Jan. The European Court of Justice and the GATT Dilemma. 1996, Apud BERKEY, Judson Osterhoudt. The European Court of Justice and direct effect for the GATT: A question worth revisiting. European Journal of International Law. v. 9, 1998. Disponível em <http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/9/4/692.pdf> Acesso em 02 ago 2009.
MACROTY, Patrick F. J. et al. The World Trade Organization: legal, economic and political analysis. Nova Iorque: Springer, 2005, 3120 p.
MARTINS, Patrícia Fragoso. O princípio do primado do direito comunitário sobre as normas constitucionais dos estados-membros: dos tratados ao projecto de constituição europeia. Lisboa : Principia, 2006. 208 p.
PALMETER, N. David, MAVROIDIS, Petros C. Dispute settlement in the World Trade Organization: practice and procedure. 2. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 330 p.
PERE, Mervi. Non-implementation of WTO dispute settlement decisions and liability actions, in Nordic Journal of Commercial Law. v. 1 (2004), 2004. Disponível em <http://www.njcl.utu.fi/1_2004/article1.pdf>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
Notas
[1]Por todos, KUILWIJK, Kees Jan. The European Court of Justice and the GATT Dilemma. 1996, Apud BERKEY, Judson Osterhoudt. The European Court of Justice and direct effect for the GATT: A question worth revisiting. European Journal of International Law. v. 9, 1998. Disponível em <http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/9/4/692.pdf> Acesso em 02 ago 2009.
[2]Artigo 288.o (…) Em matéria de responsabilidade extracontratual, a Comunidade deve indemnizar, de acordo com os princípios gerais comuns aos direitos dos Estados-Membros, os danos causados pelas suas instituições ou pelos seus agentes no exercício das suas funções.
[3]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. CONSELHO. Diretiva 81/602/CE, 31/07/1981. Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31981L0602:EN:HTML>; Diretiva 88/146/CEE, 07/03/1988. Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31988L0146:EN:HTML>; Diretiva 96/22/CE, 29/04/1996. Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0022:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[4]OMC. Acordo sobre aplicação de medidas sanitárias e fitosanitárias. Disponível em <http://www.mercosur.int/msweb/Portal%20Intermediario/Normas/normas_web/Decisiones/PT/Dec_006_096_Acordo%20Aplic%20Medidas%20Sanit%20Fitossanit%20OMC_Ata%202_96.PDF>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[5]OMC. Dispute Settlement Undestanding. Disponível em <http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/28-dsu.pdf>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[6]Conforme visto em <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds26_e.htm>. Acesso em 07 jan 2013.
[7]Segundo o art. 222 CE, ao Advogado-Geral cabe "apresentar publicamente, com toda a imparcialidade e independência, conclusões fundamentadas sobre as causas que, nos termos do Estatuto do Tribunal de Justiça, requeiram sua intervenção".
[8]DI GIANNI, Fabrizio, ANTONINI, Renato. DSB decisions and direct effect of WTO law: Should EC courts be more flexible when the flexibility of the WTO system has come to an end. 40 Journal of World Trade. p. 777-793, 2006. Disponível em < http://www.vanbaelbellis.com/files/WTO-dir%20effect-110904A.pdf> . Acesso em 02 ago 2009.
[9]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: R.&V.Haegeman v Belgian State, 30/04/1974 (181/73). Disponível em < http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61973J0181:EN:HTML>. Acesso em: 03 ago 2009.
[10]QUADROS, Fausto de. Direito da União Europeia. Coimbra: Livraria Almedina, 2004. p. 371
[11]QUADROS, Fausto de. Direito da União Europeia. Coimbra: Livraria Almedina, 2004. p. 377
[12]ARNULL, Anthony. European Union and its Court of Justice, The. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. p. 75-76
[13]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: NV Algemene Transport- en Expeditie Onderneming van Gend & Loos v. Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration, 05/02/1963 (26/62). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61962J0026:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[14]Artigo 12 . Os Estados-membros abster-se-ão de introduzir entre si novos direitos aduaneiros de importação e de exportação ou encargos de efeito equivalente e de aumentar aqueles que já aplicam nas suas relações comerciais mútuas.
[15]ARNULL, Anthony. European Union and its Court of Justice, The. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. p. 78-79
[16]"The wordin of Article 12 contains a clear and unconditional prohibition which is not a positive but a negative obligation. This obligation, moreover, is not qualified by any reservation on the part of states which would make its implementation conditional upon a positive legislative measure enacted under national law. The very nature of this prohibition makes it ideally adapted to produce direct effects in the legal relationship between Member States and their subjects" no original
[17]LOUIS, Jean-Victor, VANDERSANDE, Georges e WAELBROECK, Michel. Les États Membres et la Jurisprudence de la Cour - Journeé d'Études Organisée par l'Association Belge pour le Droit Europeen et l'Institut d'Études Européennes de lUniversité Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, 25 janvier 1980. Edições da Universidade de Bruxelas:Bruxelas, 1981, p. 70. Apud MARTINS, Patrícia Fragoso. O princípio do primado do direito comunitário sobre as normas constitucionais dos estados-membros: dos tratados ao projecto de constituição europeia. Lisboa : Principia, 2006. p. 28
[18]HARTLEY, Trevor C. The foundations of European Community law: an introduction to the constitutional and administrative law of the European Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 6. Ed. p. 193
[19]HARTLEY, Trevor C. The foundations of European Community law: an introduction to the constitutional and administrative law of the European Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 6. Ed. p. 194-197
[20]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: Syndicat professionnel coordination des pêcheurs de l'étang de Berre et de la région v. Électricité de France (EDF), 15/07/2004 (213/03). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62003J0213:PT:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[21]"The Court of Justice od the European Communities (ECJ) has contribuited extensively to precisely define the concept of direct applicability of agreements, both with regard to the Community law capacity to produce direct effects within the legal ordes of member states and with regard to agreements entered into by the European Community and third countries" no original.
[22]CAPALDO, Giuliana Ziccardi. The pillars of global law. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, 2008. p. 180
[23]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: International Fruit Company NV and others v. Produktschap voor Groeten en Fruit), 12/12/1972 (21 a 24/72). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61972J0021:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[24]KELSEN, Hans. Pure Theory of law. Clark: The Lawbook Exchange Ltda, 2005. p. 33
[25]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: Portuguese Republic v Council of the European Union, 23/11/1999 (149/96). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61996J0149:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[26]MACROTY, Patrick F. J. et al. The World Trade Organization: legal, economic and political analysis. Nova Iorque: Springer, 2005. p. 1499 e ss.
[27]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: Fédération de l'industrie de l'huilerie de la CEE (Fediol) v Commission of the European Communities, 22/06/1989 (70/87). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61987J0070:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[28]UNIÃO EUROPEIA. TJCE: Nakajima All Precision co. Ltd v Council of the European Communities, 07/05/1991 (69/89). Disponível em <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61989J0069:EN:HTML>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[29]"persistent adherence to the traditional mercantilist, negative and defensive view of foreign trade policy" no original
[30]KUILWIJK, Kees Jan. The European Court of Justice and the GATT Dilemma. 1996, Apud BERKEY, Judson Osterhoudt. The European Court of Justice and direct effect for the GATT: A question worth revisiting. European Journal of International Law. v. 9, 1998. Disponível em <http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/9/4/692.pdf> Acesso em 02 ago 2009. p.4
[31]"divine guidance... needed to attain economic paradise" no original
[32]OMC. Dispute Settlement Undestanding. Disponível em <http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/28-dsu.pdf>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009.
[33]"1. Where a panel or the Appellate Body concludes that a measure is inconsistent with a covered agreement, it shall recommend that the Member concerned(9) bring the measure into conformity with that agreement.(10) In addition to its recommendations, the panel or Appellate Body may suggest ways in which the Member concerned could implement the recommendations."
[34]"3. (...) If it is impracticable to comply immediately with the recommendations and rulings, the Member concerned shall have a reasonable period of time in which to do so.(...)"
[35]"1. Compensation and the suspension of concessions or other obligations are temporary measures available in the event that the recommendations and rulings are not implemented within a reasonable period of time. However, neither compensation nor the suspension of concessions or other obligations is preferred to full implementation of a recommendation to bring a measure into conformity with the covered agreements. Compensation is voluntary and, if granted, shall be consistent with the covered agreements.
2. If the Member concerned fails to bring the measure found to be inconsistent with a covered agreement (...) such Member shall, (...) enter into negotiations with any party having invoked the dispute settlement procedures, with a view to developing mutually acceptable compensation."
[36]PERE, Mervi. Non-implementation of WTO dispute settlement decisions and liability actions, in Nordic Journal of Commercial Law. v. 1 (2004), 2004. Disponível em <http://www.njcl.utu.fi/1_2004/article1.pdf>. Acesso em 03 ago 2009. p. 16-17
[37]PALMETER, N. David, MAVROIDIS, Petros C. Dispute settlement in the World Trade Organization: practice and procedure. 2. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. p. 301-302
[38]http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds26_e.htm
