翻译公司资讯

英语短文-法律英语-英语翻译-法律翻译
The United States, after threatening unilateral action under the much criticized Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, brought the matter to the WTO. The facts presented by the United States Trade Representative were sharply contested. But even if these facts had been conceded, the United States would have faced a serious problem: neither trade law nor antitrust law provided a forum or context for examination of the whole problem. The alleged private restraints were subject to the jurisdiction of the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC), but the JFTC, not unpredictably, found no antitrust violation. Japan's trade-restraining statutes, alone, were the basis for the US case at the WTO, but they were only a piece of the picture. A dispute resolution panel concluded that Japan's laws did not run afoul of the GATT rules. Whether the laws seriously harmed trade and competition was not relevant. The GATT's prohibitions against trade-restraining laws are narrow. They do not prohibit measures simply because they unreasonably restrain trade. The US challenge failed because (i) the trade-restraining laws of the Japanese government were not new restraints of which the United States had no notice at the time Japan agreed to reduce its trade protection (i.e. the existence and enforcement of the laws did not defeat United States' reasonable expectations) and (ii) the measures did not discriminate against foreigners; they were neutral on their face.


-------------------------------------------------------------
资料由
索文（北京、上海、广州、深圳、洛杉矶、柏林、香港）翻译公司提供，公司是国内首家在欧美、香港地区设立3家分公司的国际化连锁）翻译公司，是中华人民共和国司法部指定的 专业翻译认证机构，翻译文件加盖经北京市公安局中英文特批中英文翻译专用章（特 No.0018457）所盖公章通行多个国家、地区。国家外汇管理局、各驻华使领馆、公安局出入境管理处、司法机关、公证处及其他政府机构均承认我公司的译文效力。公司网址：https://www.soven.com