Do Different Treaty Purposes Matter for Treaty Interpretation?: The Elimination of Discriminatory Internal Taxes in EC and WTO Law
Marco Slotboom
Abstract
Marco Slotboom
Abstract
The comparison made in this contribution between Article III:2 GATT and Article 90 EC indicates that different treaty purposes need not matter that much, if the text and purpose of individual provisions are similar. Indeed, the different objectives and purposes of the GATT and the EC have not led to noticeably different interpretations of the similarly worded obligations on WTO Members and EC Member States concerning the elimination of discriminatory internal taxes in Article III:2 GATT and Article 90 EC. This finding is in line with Article 31 (1) of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, which puts emphasis on the relevance of the wording of treaty provisions. The European Court of Justice (ECJ), however, pays more attention to the object and purpose of the EC Treaty when interpreting a provision of that treaty. Would one have followed the line of reasoning of the ECJ, one might therefore have expected another conclusion.
OpenAlex reports 25 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The comparison made in this contribution between Article III:2 GATT and Article 90 EC indicates that different treaty purposes need not matter that much, if the text and purpose of individual provisions are similar. Indeed, the different objectives and purposes of the GATT and the EC have not led to noticeably different interpretations of the similarly worded obligations on WTO Members and EC Member States concerning the elimination of discriminatory internal taxes in Article III:2 GATT and Article 90 EC. This finding is in line with Article 31 (1) of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, which puts emphasis on the relevance of the wording of treaty provisions. The European Court of Justice (ECJ), however, pays more attention to the object and purpose of the EC Treaty when interpreting a provision of that treaty. Would one have followed the line of reasoning of the ECJ, one might therefore have expected another conclusion.
Key concepts: Treaty, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Interpretation (philosophy), Convention, Law, European court of justice, Political science, Relevance (law)