![]() This legal principle was developed by the ECJ when it became clear - especially in Comet (1976) - that there was an important first obstacle to the proper implementation of substantive (directly applicable) Community law: discrimination of Community law issues against similar, purely domestic issues as a consequence of the application of national (procedural law) regulations. ![]() More specifically, in the context of EU Law, the principle of equivalence requires Member States not to treat matters under EU law less favorably than purely domestic matters. This is the case also in the context of European Union (EU) law and the specific reason why the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has, from the outset, referred together to the two criteria of equivalence and effectiveness. An important threshold for achieving equivalence in this context is to define the regulatory objectives and, on this basis, to determine the level (such as the minimum level of protection) that national legislation/measures must achieve. This applies also within the framework of the World Trade Organization. Thus, in international law, the principles of mutual recognition and equivalence are normally used as cooperation-promoting instruments. Nevertheless, full harmonization may not be achievable in practice or even desirable for legitimate reasons. ![]() The aim of harmonization is to standardize legislation on an international basis. In order to promote cooperation at the international level in the best possible way, harmonization of national legislation would probably be the best instrument to be used, also within the framework of international trade organizations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |