|
|
T. Port 判決において、第1審裁判所は、以下のように述べ、Nakajima 判決理論や Fediol 判決理論の適用を否定している。
|
|
58. |
In that regard,
it is only where the Community intends to implement a particular
obligation assumed in the context of the WTO, or where the Community
measurerefers expressly to the precise provisions of the agreements
contained in the annexes to the WTO Agreement, that it is for the
Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance to review the
legality of the Community measure in question in the light of the
WTO rules (see Portugal v Council, paragraph 49).
|
|
59. |
Neither the reports of the WTO Panel of 22 May 1997 nor the report of the WTO Standing Appellate Body of 9 September 1997 which was adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body on 25 September 1997 included any special obligations which the Commission 'intended to implement, within the meaning of the case-law, in Regulation No 2362/98 (see with regard to the 1947 GATT, Case C-69/89 Nakajima v Council [1991] ECR I-2069, paragraph 31). The regulation does not make express reference either to any specific obligations arising out of the reports of WTO bodies, or to specific provisions of the agreements contained in the annexes to the WTO Agreement.
|