{"id":491,"date":"2016-01-31T09:15:46","date_gmt":"2016-01-31T08:15:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/?post_type=publication&p=491"},"modified":"2025-09-10T11:20:46","modified_gmt":"2025-09-10T09:20:46","slug":"les-usages-des-decisions-de-lorgane-de-reglement-des-differends-de-lorganisation-mondiale-du-commerce-par-la-cour-de-justice-de-lunion-europeenne","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/publication\/les-usages-des-decisions-de-lorgane-de-reglement-des-differends-de-lorganisation-mondiale-du-commerce-par-la-cour-de-justice-de-lunion-europeenne\/","title":{"rendered":"Les usages des d\u00e9cisions de l’Organe de r\u00e8glement des diff\u00e9rends de l’Organisation mondiale du commerce par la Cour de justice de l’Union europ\u00e9enne"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Extrait<\/strong><\/p>\n

L’Union europ\u00e9enne (UE) et l’Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC) sont unies par un objectif commun. Toutes deux ont pour mission la lib\u00e9ralisation du commerce des biens et des services, l’une \u00e0 l’\u00e9chelle mondiale, l’autre \u00e0 l’\u00e9chelle r\u00e9gionale. Cependant, chacun de ces syst\u00e8mes poss\u00e8de ses sp\u00e9cificit\u00e9s et ses objectifs propres qui apparaissent parfois inconciliables. La question du rapport entretenu par les juges de l’Union europ\u00e9enne et de l’OMC est au c\u0153ur de l’articulation entre ces deux ordres juridiques et participe \u00e0 l’analyse de leurs interactions. La pr\u00e9sente \u00e9tude propose de d\u00e9crire les diff\u00e9rentes utilisations, juridictionnelles et non-juridictionnelles, que le juge de l’Union europ\u00e9enne fait des d\u00e9cisions rendues par son homologue de l’OMC. Leur analyse montre que la CJUE fait un usage instrumentalis\u00e9 des d\u00e9cisions de l’ORD qui pr\u00e9serve dans toutes les circonstances la libert\u00e9 politique des institutions de d\u00e9terminer la politique commerciale de l’Union europ\u00e9enne. Elle adopte une interpr\u00e9tation restrictive de sa fonction de contr\u00f4le du droit de l’Union europ\u00e9enne, refusant d’utiliser les d\u00e9cisions de l’ORD pour op\u00e9rer un contr\u00f4le de la l\u00e9galit\u00e9 du droit de l’Union europ\u00e9enne ou de la responsabilit\u00e9 de ses institutions. Cependant, lorsque les objectifs de l’Union europ\u00e9enne co\u00efncident avec ceux de l’OMC, elle utilise largement les d\u00e9cisions de l’ORD au soutien de l’interpr\u00e9tation du droit de l’Union europ\u00e9enne.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Union (EU) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) are united by the same objective. They both have to liberalise world trade, the first one at the European level and the other one at the global level. However, each system has its own specificities and goals, which seem sometimes incompatible. The question of the relationship between European judges and World Trade Organization\u2019s judges is at the heart of the articulation between those two legal orders and participates to the analyse of their interactions. The following project offers a description of the different utilisations, judicial or non-judicial, that the European judge makes of the decisions pronounced by the WTO\u2019s judge. This analyze shows that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) uses decisions pronounced by the WTO\u2019s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in the way to preserve, in every circumstances, the freedom of political Institutions to determine the EU trade policy. It adopts a restrictive interpretation of its EU law control power, refusing to give to the DSB\u2019s decisions a control function of the EU law or of the EU Institutions responsibilities. However, when EU and WTO objectives are the same, the ECJ uses widely the decisions made by the ORD in order to support the interpretation of the EU law.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Acc\u00e8s au texte – Access to full text<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/form>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"template":"","publication_tax":[47],"class_list":["post-491","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication_tax-working-paper"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/491","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/491\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":494,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/491\/revisions\/494"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=491"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication_tax","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication_tax?post=491"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}