EU membership of the WTO: international trade disputes and judicial protection of individuals by EU Courts

The European Union (EU) is embedded in a pluralistic legal context because of the EU and its Member States’ treaty memberships and domestic laws. Where EU conduct has implications for both the EU’s international trade relations and the legal position of individual traders, it possibly affects EU and its Member States’ obligations under the law of the World Trade Organization (WTO law) as well as the Union’s own multi-layered constitutional legal order. The present paper analyses the way in which the European Court of Justice (ECJ) accommodates WTO and EU law in the context of international trade disputes triggered by the EU. Given the ECJ’s denial of direct effect of WTO law in principle, the paper focuses on the protection of rights and remedies conferred by EU law. It assesses the implications of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) – which tolerates the acceptance of retaliatory measures constraining traders’ activities in sectors different from those subject to the original trade dispute (Bananas and Hormones cases) – for the protection of ‘retaliation victims’. The paper concludes that governmental discretion conferred by WTO law has not affected the applicability of EU constitutional law but possibly shapes the actual scope of EU rights and remedies where such discretion is exercised in the EU’s general interest.

Shared authority: courts and legislatures in legal theory

This book advances a fresh philosophical account of the relationship between the legislature and courts, opposing the common conception of law, in which it is legislatures that primarily create the law, and courts that primarily apply it. This conception has eclectic affinities with legal positivism, and although it may have been a helpful intellectual tool in the past, it now increasingly generates more problems than it solves. For this reason, the author argues, legal philosophers are better off abandoning it. At the same time they are asked to dismantle the philosophical and doctrinal infrastructure that has been based on it and which has been hitherto largely unquestioned. In its place the book offers an alternative framework for understanding the role of courts and the legislature; a framework which is distinctly anti-positivist and which builds on Ronald Dworkin’s interpretive theory of law. But, contrary to Dworkin, it insists that legal duty is sensitive to the position one occupies in the project of governing; legal interpretation is not the solitary task of one super-judge, but a collaborative task structured by principles of institutional morality such as separation of powers which impose a moral duty on participants to respect each other's contributions. Moreover this collaborative task will often involve citizens taking an active role in their interaction with the law.

The Golden Age returns: Virgil's fourth Eclogue in the political panegyric of the Italian courts

E. H. Gombrich and others have analysed the uses made of language and imagery from Virgil's famous fourth Eclogue in panegyrical writing by partisans of the Medici dynasty in Florence. This study examines the appropriation of the theme of the returning Golden Age and related motifs from the fourth Eclogue in other Italian courts during the same period, by supporters of the Visconti and Sforza of Milan, the Gonzaga of Mantua, Leonello d'Este and his successors in Ferrara, and the Bentivoglio of Bologna, among others. The deployment of this Virgilian material in political panegyric is seen to be a central element in the self-definition and self-promotion of dynastic rulers throughout the peninsula.

Allegations of unlawful discrimination in education: parents taking their fight for Auslan to the courts

This paper examines the use of the Disability Discrimination Act (Commonwealth of Australia, 1992) by parents seeking access for their deaf children to native sign language in the classroom. It reviews a number of cases in which Australian parents have claimed indirect discrimination by educational authorities over their children's lack of access to instruction through Australian Sign Language (Auslan) and discusses the outcomes of such litigation. The policies endorsed by deafness organizations are contrasted with those of state educational authorities. The author discusses the limitations of a complaints-based system to address systemic discrimination and suggests the need for legislation to protect the linguistic rights of deaf children.

Is the treatment of economic loss by the Australian courts in torts cases anomalous?

The well developed economic theory of tort liability has never been able to comfortably accommodate negligence cases causing pure economic loss as opposed to physical damage or injury. In fact, contrary to received opinion, Australian Courts at least, are increasingly allocating pure economic losses to achieve predominantly an efficiency objective, with corrective justice notions relegated into the background. Consequently, it is difficult to classify these cases as anomalous in the sense of falling outside the efficiency paradigm.

Doing it in the courts : opening research to public scrutiny

This paper analyses the positioning of researchers and their research by the courts in legal complaints brought against educational authorities. Over the past decade at least eleven formal complaints related to deaf children's access to native sign language in education have been lodged with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

This ongoing legal action has brought a pedagogical debate over educational policy into the courts. The most recent case to reach the Federal Court of Australia was taken by the families of two deaf children against a state educational authority, allegedly for failing to provide the children with an adequate education. The complainants called for teachers fluent in Auslan (Australian Sign Language) or interpreters to be employed alongside mainstream teachers.

As a researcher in this field, I have acted as an expert witness in eight of these cases, tendered my thesis as evidence, and been cross-examined in the Federal Court. Court transcripts from the two most recent cases provide the data for an analysis of the way in which legal counsel position researchers (as 'advocates', having vested interests, representing lobby groups) and interpret their research to support the legal arguments being made.