Диссертация (1173950), страница 48
Текст из файла (страница 48)
357–372.378.Dunoff, J.L. Constitutional Conceits: The WTO’s ‘Constitution’ andthe Discipline of International Law // EJIL. – 2006. – Vol. 17, N 3. – P.647–675.379.Duvigneau, J. Die Konstitutionalisierung des WTO-Rechts: Zurjuristischen Diskussion über Verfassungsstrukturen im Bereich desHandelsvölkerrechts // Aussenwirtschaft. – 2001.
– Vol. 56, N. 3. – P. 295–325.380.Eeckhout, P. The Domestic Legal Status of the WTO Agreements:Interconnecting Legal Systems // Common Market Law Review. – 1997. –Vol. 34. Issue 1. – P. 11–58.381.231Ehlermann, C.D. On the Direct Effect of the WTO Agreements /Einhorn T. (ed.). Spontaneous Order, Organization and the Law: Roads to aEuropean Civil society. – The Hague : TMC Asser Press, 2003. – P.
413–419.382.Fitzmaurice, G. The General Principles of International LawConsidered from the Standpoint of the Rule of Law // Recueil des Cours. –1957. – Vol. 92. – P. 1–227.383.Fitzmaurice, G. The Law and Procedure of the International Court ofJustice: General Principles and Sources of International Law // BritishYearbook of International Law. – 1953. – Vol.
30. – P. 1–70.384.Hafner-Burton, E.M. Trade and Development Agreements for HumanRights? // GREAT Insights. – Vol. 1. Issue 2. – Maastricht: ECDPM, 2012.– P. 1–4.385.Heiskanen, V. The Relation of International and Municipal Law //The Finnish Yearbook of International Law. – 1990. – Vol. I.
– P. 154–256.386.Hilf, M. Power, Rules and Principles – Which Orientation forWTO/GATT law? // Journal of International Economic Law. – 2001. – Vol.4. – P. 111–130.387.Hilf, M., Goettsche, G.J. The Relation of Economic and Non–Economic Principles in International Law in Griller, S. (ed), InternationalEconomic Governance and Non-Economic Concerns: New Challenges forthe International Legal Order. Springer : Vienna, 2003. – P. 5–46.388.Howse, R. The Appellate Body Rulings in the Shrimp / Turtle Case:A New Legal Baseline for the Trade and Environmental Debate // ColumbiaJournal Environmental Law. – 2002.
– Vol. 27. – P. 489–519.389.Iwasawa, Y. Kokusai Ho Hanrei no Ugoki [Trends of the Case Lawon International Law] // Jurist. – 2006. – N 1313.390.Jackson, J.H. The WTO ‘Constitution’ and Proposed Reform: Seven‘Mantras’ Revisited // Journal of International Economic Law. – 2001. –Vol. 4. – P. 67–78.232Jackson, J.H. Status of Treaties in Domestic Legal Systems: A Policy391.Analysis // American Journal of International Law. – 1992. – Vol. 86.
– P.310–340.392.Kuijper, P.J. The Law of the GATT as a Special Field of InternationalLaw: Ignorance, Further Refinement or Self-Contained System ofInternational Law? // NETHERLANDS Yearbook of International Law. –1994. – Vol. 25. – P. 227–257.393.Lafer, C. The World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement System //Gilberto Amado Memorial Lectures. Brasilia : FUNAG, 2012. – P. 583–616.394.Leebron, D. Implementation of the Uruguay Round Results in theUnited States / Jackson J., Sykes A.
(eds.). Implementing the UruguayRound. – Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1997. – P. 175–242.395.Lennard, M. Navigating by the Stars: Interpreting the WTOAgreements // Journal of International Economic Law. – 2002. – Vol. 5. – P.17–89.396.Lia, J., Shen, Q. The Domestic Application of WTO Laws. – 2009. –Vol. 2, N 3. – P. 44–47.397.Marceau, G. Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdiction: TheRelationship Between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties //Journal of World Trade. – 2001.
– P. 1081–1131.398.Marceau, G.Z., Trachtman, J.P. GATT, TBT and SPS: A Map ofWTO Law of Domestic Regulation of Goods. In The WTO DisputeSettlement System 1995-2003 / Ortino F., Petersmann E.-.U. (ed.). – TheHague : Kluwer Law International, 2004. – P. 275–340.399.Mavroidis, P.C., Cottier, T., Davey, W.J., Fox, E.M., Komuro, N.,Horlick, G.N., Rosenthal, D.E.
Is the WTO Dispute Settlement MechanismResponsive to the Needs of the Traders – Would a System of Direct Actionby Private Parties Yield Better Results // Journal of World Trade. – 1998. –Vol. 32, N 2. – P. 147–165.400.233Mlsna, P. International Treaties in European Law: Dualism VersusMonism // Czech Yearbook of International Law. Second Decade Ahead:Tracing the Global Crisis. – 2010. – P. 145–159.401.Moseneke, D.
The role of comparative and public international law indomestic legal systems: a South African perspective // Advocate (SouthAfrica). – 2010. – P. 63–66.402.Naiki, Y. The Mandatory discretionary doctrine in WTO Law: the US– section 301 case and its aftermath // Journal of International EconomicLaw. – 2004. – Vol.7, N 1. – P. 23–72.403.Nakagawa-A., T., Shimizu-K., Taira-S., Kokusai Keizai Ho[International Economic Law] // Yuhikaku, 2003.404.Nguyen, N.
WTO Accession at Any Cost? Examining the Use ofWTO-Plus and WTO-Minus Obligations for Least-Developed CountryApplicants // Temple International and Comparative Law Journal. – 2008. –Vol. 22, N 1. – P. 1–277.405.Oliphant, B. Interpreting the Charter with international law: pitfallsand principles // Appeal. – 2014. – Vol. 19. – P. 105–129.406.Palmeter, D., Mavroidis, P.C. The WTO Legal System: Sources ofLaw // AJIL. – 1998. – Vol. 92. – P. 398–413.407.Palmeter, D. The WTO as a Legal System // Fordham InternationalLaw Journal.
– 2000. – Vol. 24. – P. 444–480.408.Paust,J.J.Self-ExecutingTreaties//AmericanJournalofInternational Law. –1928. –Vol. 82. – P. 760–783.409.Pauwelyn, J.A Typology of Multilateral Treaty Obligations: AreWTO Obligations Bilateral or Collective in Nature? // EJIL. – 2003. – Vol.14. – P. 907–951.410.Pauwelyn, J. The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: HowFar Can We Go? // AJIL. – 2001. – Vol. 95. – P. 535–578.411.234Pauwelyn, J. Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rulesare Rules – Toward a More Collective Approach // American Journal ofInternational Law. – 2000. – Vol.
94. – P. 335–347.412.Petersmann, E.-U. Dispute Settlement in International Economic Law– Lessons for Strengthening International Dispute Settlement in NonEconomic Areas // Journal of International Economic Law. – 1999. – Vol. 2.– P.189–248.413.Petersmann, E.-U. Constitutionalism and International Organizations// Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business.
– 1996. – Vol.17. – P. 398–469.414.Petersmann, E.-U. Theories of Justice, Human Rights and theConstitution of International Markets // Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review.– 2003. – Vol. 37. – P. 407–460.415.Prechal, S. Does Direct Effect Still Matter? // Common Market LawReview. – 2000. – Vol. 37.
Issie 5. – P. 1047–1069.416.Romero, A.C. El efecto directo de los acuerdos OMC: la sentencia de23 de noviembre de 1999 (Portugal c. Consejo, C-149/96) o la obstinaciondel TJCE // Revista de Derecho Comunitarion Europeo. – 2000. – № 7.417.Povarchuk, R.
Cambodia’s WTO Accession: A Strenuous butNecessary Step for a Poor Nation Seeking Economic Prosperity // PacificRim Law and Policy Journal. – 2004. – Vol. 13, N. 3. – P. 645–671.418.Schabas, W. A. Twenty-Five Years of Public International Law at theSupreme Court of Canada // The Canadian Bar Review. – 2000. – Vol. 79.
–P. 174–195.419.Seidl – Hohenveldern, I. Transformation or Adoption of InternationalLaw into Municipal Law // International & Comparative Law Quarterly. –1963. – Vol. 12, N 1. – P. 88–124.420.Sei Fujii v. California case // American Journal of International Law.– 1952. – Vol. 46, N.3. – P. 559–573.421.235Simma, B., Pulkowski, D. Legal Speciales and Self-ContainedRegimes / J. Crawford, A. Pellet and S. Olleson (eds.).
The Law ofInternational Responsibility. – Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010. – P.139–163.422.Smith, W. Hallward-Driemeier M. Understanding the InvestmentClimate // Finance and Development, 2005. – P. 40–43.423.Trachtman, J.P. The Domain of WTO Dispute Resolution // HarvardInternational Law Journal. – 1999. – Vol. 40. – 333 p.424.Van Ert, G. Dubious Dualism: The Reception of International Law inCanada // Valparaiso University Law Review.
– 2010. – Vol. 44, N 3. – P.927–934.425.Varquez, C.M. The Four Doctrines of Self-Executing Treaties //American Journal of International Law. – 1995. – Vol. 695. – P. 695–723.426.Varquez, C.M. Response: Laughing at Treaties // Columbia LawReview. – 1999. – Vol. 99, N. 8. – P. 2154–2217.427.Verhoeven, J.
La notion d'applicabilité directe du droit international //Revue belge de droit international. – 1980. – N 2. – P. 243–264.428.Von Bogdandy, A. Pluralism, direct effect, and the ultimate say: Onthe relationship between international and domestic constitutional law //International Journal of Constitutional Law. – 2008.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
