Cha. 4 - Legal Aspects of International Business - A Canadian Perspective, 4-115-151

CHAPTER 4
The European Union and Other

Regional Trade Arrangements
LEARNING OBJECTIVES CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction 95
After reading this chapter you will understand:
The Historical Development of the European Union 95
• the historical development of the European Union
Governance of the European Union 99
• governance of the European Union Law Enforcement in the European Union 103
• law-making in the European Union CETAand Canadian Business 104
• the EU'sand Canada'seconomic and trade relationship under CHA European Union Lega l Provisions Relevant to Canadian
Business 109
• certain EU laws relevant to Canadian businesses
Brexit and the EU 118
• the impact of Brexit on the EU and Canada Other Regional TradeArrangements 119
• other regional trade arrangements Chapter Summary 126
Review Questions 126
Notes 127
Further Reading 131
Websites 131
List of Cases 131
Introduction
After the United States, the European Union (EU) is Canada's second-largest trading partner and
the world's largest single common market, with over 500 million consumers.1 Since the entry
into force in 2017 of the Canada- European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agree-
ment (CETA) 2 - an all-inclusive and progressive free trade agreement that covers most aspects of
the Canada- EU economic relationship- trade in goods and services has significantly increased
between Canada and the EU. Canada exported $85.2 billion in goods and services to the EU in
2018, compared to $55.3 billion in goods and services in 2011, and the total imports into Canada
from the EU topped $63 billion.3 Because of its significance to trade in Canada, the EU will be
explored in depth in this chapter. The last part of the chapter will briefly outline other regional
trade agreements and groupings that Canadian businesses should be aware of and consider when
assessing strategies for doing business internationally.
The Historical Development of the European Union

Early Development
After the Second World War, Europe's primary concern was establishing long-lasting peace and
security. The destruction and suffering caused by the two world wars made peace a fundamental
political and economic priority. Today's EU is a result of a long journey toward achieving this
goal, which started with the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), which was formed
in 1952. Its members were France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.
95
© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

96 Part I Public International Law
BOX 4.1 Why Do the Names We Use for the European Union Change?
In this book, you will notice that three different abbreviations for the European Union are used. This
reflects the changes in name that have occurred over the years. So, if we are referring to an event at
a certain point in time, we refer to the union using the name it had at that time. These names, their
abbreviations, and their dates of creation are as follows:
the European Economic Community (EEC): created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome;
the European Community (EC): created in 1986 after the Single European Act; and
the European Union (EU): created in 1993 by the Treaty on European Union.
Recognizing that coal and steel were sources of military development and might, Robert
Schuman, the French foreign minister, created a plan that would make any war between France
and Germany impossible and that would lead to the creation of the "United States of Europe."
The treaty creating the ECSC was the first step toward this federalist idea. Under the ECSC, treaty
member states agreed to remove tariff barriers on shipments of coal, iron, and scrap metal. The
integration of coal, iron, and steel industries among the original members was intended to create
economic and military unity between France and Germany, thus preventing another war, and
establish a framework for all countries to develop peacefully, cooperatively, and interdependently.
In 1957, the same six countries founded the European Atomic Community and, more im-
portantly, signed the Treaty of Rome.4 It was this treaty that established the European Economic
Community (EEC). The treaty has had far-reaching effects on Europe's economic history and,
indeed, on today's global trading environment. While the ECSC removed tariffs on coal and steel
only, the purpose of the Treaty of Rome was to create a common market in which all countries
agreed to gradually eliminate all trade barriers among themselves and form a common external
tariff on all goods entering the EEC and further the goal of economic interdependence as a
means to permanent peace. Even at this stage the EEC was able to negotiate trade agreements
with non-EEC countries and demonstrate its potential to become a major international actor
and regain its influence on the world political stage, which had been lost as a result of the Second
World War and the rise of the United States.
Important Treaties in the EU's Development

The Single European Act
After 1957, the next major development for Europe was the adoption of the Single European Act, 5
signed by the then 12 members of the EEC, which became the European Community (EC) in
1986. The stated objective of the Act was to progressively establish a single market by the end of
1992. The single market was envisaged as an area without internal borders to goods, services,
capital, and people. To achieve the single market, member states had to abolish barriers of all
kinds; harmonize rules, legislation, and tax structures; strengthen their monetary cooperation;
and impose measures to encourage European firms to work together. As well, the four freedoms
of the single market were promoted:
1. Unrestricted movement ofgoods- ensures that imports move freely within the EC once
they enter any member state.
Treaty of Rome: thefounding treaty establishing the European EconomicCommunity (EEC), signed by France, Belgium, Germany,
Italy, Luxembourg, andthe Netherlands
four freedoms of the single market: created by the EU in the Single European Act of 1986, they are freedom of movement of
goods, unrestricted movement of capital, unrestricted movement of services, and unrestricted movement of people

Chapter 4 The European Union and Other Regional Trade Arrangements 97
2. Unrestricted movement of capital- enhan ces competition and choice in financial ser-
vices, gives borrowers access to more diverse and cheaper financing, and permits more
competitive financing for investment and trade within the EC.
3. Unrestricted movement ofservices- frees the movement of services among member states.
4. Unrestricted movement ofpeople-allows labour to move freely within the EC.
Additional goals included eliminating technical barriers-that is, once a product met the
technical standards of any EC member, it would have unrestricted distribution to all EC coun -
tries. A further goal was the removal of all fiscal barriers-that is, reducing the differences in
indirect taxes that distort trade among member states. An additional and very important goal
was to open the public procurement market to competition from firms from other countries.
The Maastricht Treaty

The Treaty on European Union (TEU), or the Maastricht Treaty, entered into force in 1993.
It was this treaty that gave birth to the European Union as a new legal entity and changed the
name of the European Community to the EU. This treaty also created the European concept of
the three pillars, which set out the distribution of responsibilities in the EU between the new
legal entity and the member states (see Table 4. 1).
This agreement resulted in significant progress toward greater integration of European mon-
etary, foreign, and social policy. European federalists hoped for a commitment to economic and
monetary union at this meeting, while others took the view that economic and monetary union
necessarily entailed political union.
The Treaty of Amsterdam

The Treaty of Amsterdam,6 signed in 1997, was negotiated to provide clarification on civil rights,
personal mobility and citizenship, common foreign policy, and security as well as to set some
TABLE 4.1 The Three Pillars Showing the Distribution of Responsibilities in the EU
The First Pillar The Second Pillar The Third Pillar
(Areas where member states have reli n- (Matters managed on an (Matters relating to police and
quished some of their sovereignt y to EU intergovernmental basis) judicial cooperat ion in criminal
institutions) matters-managed on an inter-
Foreign policy
governmental basis)
Customs union and the single market
Security policy
(including the four freedoms) Police cooperation
Agricultural policy Racism
Environmental policy Crime
Competition and trade policy Terrorism
Fiscal and monetary issues (common

currency)
Treaty on European Union (TEU), or MaastrichtTreaty: agreement signed on February 7, 1992, and entered into force in
1993 in the Dutch city of Maastricht; it gave impetus to further integration of the EU, particularly in theareas of economic union,
political integration, social policy, and foreign policy; and it changed thename of theEuropean EconomicCommunity to the European
Union and created the European concept of thethree pillars
three pillars: terminology adoptedby theEU, after theMaastricht Treaty, that describes the distribution of responsibilities in the EU

pre-conditions for further expansion of the EU community. The treaty incorporated the prin-
ciples of the Schengen Agreement7 on the gradual abolition of border checks for people crossing
national borders within the EU. A single external frontier was agreed on where checks would be
carried out in accordance with harmonized rules for a common visa regime and an improved
coordination of police, customs, and the judiciary. At present, 22 member states in the EU par-
ticipate in Schengen along with non-EU members Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Switzer-
land. Except for cooperation between police forces and the judiciary, the United Kingdom and
Ireland do not as yet participate in this arrangement.
The Treaty of Nice

The Treaty of Nice, 8 in force since 2003, redefined, clarified, and extended the legislative, ad-
ministrative, executive, and judicial powers of the EU, which in turn increased opportunities for
qualified majority voting.
The Treaty of Lisbon

Because the institutions and the governance of the EU have been developed by successive treaties
over a period of years, it is generally acknowledged that there is a need to consolidate all existing
European treaties into a single document that can serve as a constitution for the EU. However,
despite successive intergovernmental conferences that have been held to try to accomplish this,
a constitution for the EU remains elusive. The most recent attempt to do so, commencing with a
draft constitution in 2004, ultimately failed when voters in France and the Netherlands defeated
the draft constitution in specific referenda held for the purpose of approval of the initiative.
The Treaty of Lisbon9 was a more modest attempt to achieve some of the constitutional
reforms that failed to pass in the new draft constitution proposed in 2004. It came into effect on
December 1, 2009, and accomplished a number of things, including the following:
• merged the EU and the European Community into a single European Union based on
two treaties of equal status: a revised TEU and the Treaty on the Functioning of the Euro-
pean Union (TFEU), 10 which is essentially a renamed Treaty of Rome;
• abolished the three-pillar structure;
• gave legal effect to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Char-
ter),11 which had previously been unclear;
• gave the European Central Bank official status as an EU institution and gave the European
Council the right to appoint presidents of the European Central Bank through a qualified
majority vote; 12
• gave the European Council an official institutional role in the EU and empowered it to
define the political direction and priorities of the EU;13
• created the permanent position of president of the European Council, with the roles of
external representation, driving consensus, and settling divergences among member
states; 14
• gave more power to the European Parliament, with the result that the Council of the
European Union and the European Parliament are jointly responsible for the legislative
function of the EU; 15 and
• changed the apportionment of Member of European Parliament (MEP) seats among
member states and allowed for the number of MEPs to be fixed and redistributed among
member states so that they remain proportional to the number of citizens in each state.
The total number ofMEPs was limited to 750 plus the president of the Parliament. 16

BOX 4.2 Present Member States in the EU and Their Accession Dates
1957 Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands.
1973 Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom.
1981 Greece.
1986 Portugal, Spain.
1995* Austria, Finland, Sweden.
2004 Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Cyprus,
Malta.
2007 Romania, Bulgaria.
2013 Croatia.
•Norway did not join in 1995, its electorate having defeated approval for membership in a national referendum.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

In 2000, the European Commission, the European Council, and the EU Parliament jointly
signed and proclaimed the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter).
The Charter incorporates a sweeping range of civil, political, economic, and social rights and
synthesizes the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the EU mem-
ber states. The rights described are divided into six categories: dignity, freedoms, equality, soli-
darity, citizens' rights, and justice. These rights go well beyond the enshrined rights in Canada
and the United States, referring to such rights as the right to reconciliation of one's family and
professional life and the right to social security benefits, services, and health care.
The Common Currency

After many years of doubt as to whether the goal of a common currency for Europe would be
achieved, the euro was adopted as the common currency for 11 member states on January 1,
1999. The 11 member states were Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg,
the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, and Finland. In 2019, 19 EU states and 4 non-EU states-
Andorra, Monaco, San-Marina, and Vatican City- were using the euro. The 19 EU states are col-
lectively known as the eurozone or euro-area.17 Euro notes and coins have replaced the national
currencies in all participating member states, and the dual circulation period for old and new
currencies ended in 2002. The transition was achieved remarkably smoothly, and statistics indi-
cate substantial transaction-cost savings due to the adoption of the euro. The European Central
Bank, located in Frankfurt, is responsible for ensuring that member states conform to the com-
mon currency rules.
Membership of the EU
From its original six members, the EU has expanded to 28. The population of the EU now
exceeds 500 million people. North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania, and Turkey remain
candidates for membership. is
Governance of the European Union

Setting the Legislative Agenda: The European Council
The European Council is tasked with defining "the overall political directions and priorities"
of the Union. 19 Made up of the presidents and/or prime ministers of all the member countries,

FIGURE 4.1 Institutions of the EU
I European Council
I
European Cou ncil of the
Commission European Union
Court of Justice of the
~/ European Communities
European
Parliament European Court
of Auditors
it provides the high-level political direction for policy in the EU. Because of its high-level focus
on setting the broad policy agenda, the European Council is often considered to be the motor
of European integration. As an intergovernmental forum, it does not create law in any sense.
It meets up to four times a year with the president of the EU Commission. These meetings are
referred to as EU summit meetings. The president of the European Council provides external
representation for the EU, drives consensus among member countries, and settles divergences
among member states.
Law-Making in the European Union: The Council of the European Union,

the European Parliament, and the European Commission
The Council of the European Union
Care must be taken not to confuse the Council of the European Union (an official law-making
component of the EU system) with the European Council (the intergovernmental body described
above). The Council of the European Union was previously the only official law-making body
of the EU system; however, changes in the Treaty of Lisbon altered this by increasing the power
of the European Parliament. Now, the Council of the European Union (the Council) is one half
of the legislative arm of the EU with the other half being the European Parliament, described in
the next section.20
Most of the responsibilities of the Council relate to the community domain and include pas-
sage of EU laws jointly with the EU Parliament, coordination of the broad economic policies of
member states, conclusion of international agreements, and approval of the EU budget jointly
with the EU Parliament. The responsibility to develop a common foreign and security policy
and to coordinate cooperation between the national courts and police forces in criminal mat-
ters relates to areas in which member states have not relinquished their national powers but are
simply working together (the second and third pillars shown in Table 4.1).
The European Parliament

Since 1979, MEPs have been elected directly by the more than 500 million citizens of EU mem-
ber countries. Elections are held every five years for the 750-member chamber. MEPs do not sit
in national blocs but in Europe-wide political groups.
The EU Parliament has three main roles: to pass European laws, to provide democratic
supervision, and to approve the budget. The European Parliament can appoint and dismiss the

Commission and oversees how the money in the budget is spent. The European Parliament has
proven to be an effective check on the Commission and has a significant role in passing most EU
legislation and the budget. Its influence and power are widely recognized by lobbyists represent-
ing business interests and being present in Brussels in an effort to sway EU decision-makers.
The European Commission

The term "European Commission" is used in two ways: (1) to describe its commissioners and
(2) to describe its structure.
Commissioners to the European Commission are appointed by their home countries-at
present, one is appointed per country. A new Commission is appointed every five years, with
member state governments first agreeing on a designate as the new Commission president. Once
this individual is approved by the EU Parliament, she, in discussion with member governments,
chooses the other members of the Commission. The choices must then be approved by the EU
Parliament. Although the appointed commissioners have often held political positions in their
countries of origin, once they are members of the European Commission they are committed
to acting in the interests of the EU as a whole and do not take instructions from their national
governments. This commitment reflects the intention that the Commission be independent of
national governments because its mandate is to represent and uphold the interests of the EU as
a whole.
The Commission has two functions: first, to draft proposals for new European laws, which
it presents to the EU Parliament and the Council; and second, to function as the EU's executive
arm-that is, to be responsible for implementing the decisions of Parliament and the Council
and to manage the day-to-day business of the EU by implementing policies, running programs,
and "paying the bills:' The Commission remains politically accountable to the EU Parliament,
which has the power to dismiss the whole Commission by adopting a motion of censure. The
Commission attends all the sessions of the EU Parliament, where it must clarify and justify its
policies and reply to written and oral questions posed by MEPs.
The term "European Commission" also refers to the institution itself and its staff. The day-
to-day running of the Commission is carried out by administrative officials, experts, translators,
and secretarial staff that number more than 25,000 people.
The Commission has four main roles: proposing new legislation, implementing EU policies
and the budget, enforcing European law, and representing the EU internationally. It is the Com-
mission that represents the EU in trade negotiations worldwide.
EU Law and Member State Law

Article 13(2) of the TEU states "Each institution shall act within the limits of the powers con-
ferred on it in the Treaties, and in conformity with the procedures, conditions, and objectives set
out in them:'21 This means that the EU's institutions- the Council, Parliament, and the Commis-
sion-have competence to make laws only in certain fields. Article 3 of the TFEU sets out the
following competencies as falling within the EU's institutions' exclusive jurisdiction:
(a) the customs union;

(b) the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the member states whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy; and
(e) common commercial policy (which concerns trade with third countries).
The EU also has exclusive jurisdiction to negotiate and enter into certain international
agreements.

Pursuant to Article 4 of the TFEU, the EU shares competencies with the member states in
law-making in the areas of
(a) its internal market;

(b) aspects of social policy;
(c) economic, social, and territorial cohesion (that is, addressing the economic regional dispari-
ties in the EU);
(d) agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources;
(e) the environment;
(f) consumer protection;
(g) transport;
(h) trans-European networks;
(i) energy;
(j) freedom, security, and justice; and
(k) common safety concerns in public-health matters.
Pursuant to Article 6 of the TFEU, the EU has competence only to "support, coordinate or
supplement the actions of Members States" in the following areas:
(a) the protection and improvement of human health;

(b) industry;
(c) culture;
(d) tourism;
(e) education, vocational training, youth, and sport;
(f) civil protection; and
(g) administrative cooperation.
The capacity of the EU Parliament, Council, and Commission to make laws is limited by the
EU treaties, and it should be clear that EU member states retain exclusive jurisdiction to make
domestic laws within their purview as long as these do not conflict with their EU treaty obliga-
tions. For instance, although competition law is harmonized across EU, contract law is not. This
means that a Canadian company interested in doing business with another company in the EU
needs to be aware of both types oflegislative regimes and understand which laws are created and
harmonized throughout the EU, which laws will be unique to each EU member state, and how
these laws affect the business transaction.
Harmonization of Law in the EU

The single market of the EU is created by harmonizing the laws of the member countries. This is
the process of making the different countries' laws uniform in either form or results. EU law has
primacy over domestic law of each member state. 22 The supremacy of EU law over domestic law
is necessary to ensure uniform application of the laws in all member states.
The TFEU gives the Council and the European Commission power to make regulations,
issue directives, take decisions, and make recommendations or deliver opinions. The effect of
these actions may be explained as follows:
regulations: binding law in itsentirety and directly applicablein all member states
directive: document used in the EUto help achieve harmonization of law; it prescribes objectives for legislation and is binding
uponeach member country, but leaves theformand method used to achieve the result toindividual member countries
decision: a legally binding order made by the Council or the European Commission on the member state, firm, or individual to
whomit isaddressed
recommendation: a not legally binding but highly persuasive statement made by the Council or the European Comm ission

• A regulation is binding in its entirety and is directly applicable in all member states. Regu-
lations are the most powerful of the EU legislative tools, as they are of general application
and impose common requirements on everyone that falls within the scope. This is the
method commonly used to regulate agriculture and competition.
• A directive prescribes objectives and is binding on each member state to which it is
addressed, although the national authorities of the member state are free to determine
the form and method that will be used to achieve the mandated result. Countries usually
have three years to implement a directive. Examples of directives include establishing EU
environmental and product-liability rules.
• A decision is binding on the member state, firm, or individual to whom it is addressed. An
example of this is the decision by the European Commission that Microsoft had violated
EU competition law by leveraging its near monopoly for PC operating systems. 23
• A recommendation or an opinion is of persuasive value but has no binding effect. For example,
when the Commission issued its recommendation on videoconferencing to help judicial ser-
vices work better across borders, this had no legal consequences on the EU member states.
Law Enforcement in the European Union

The European Commission
The European Commission ensures that EU law is properly applied in all the member states. If
an EU country is not applying an EU law, the Commission will advise the member government
in an official letter stating the details of the infringement and setting a deadline for a response. If
the response of the member state is deemed by the Commission to be unsatisfactory, the Com-
mission will refer the matter to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
The European Court ofJustice

One of the reasons for the EU's success lies in its adherence to the rule of law. Relations among
member states and EU's citizens are governed by a solidified legal framework. This legal certainty
affords a stable business environment and eliminates major risks. The cornerstone of this legal
system and its ultimate overseer is the ECJ. Established in 1952, the ECJ is based in Luxembourg.
Its function is to settle legal disputes between EU member states and EU institutions, businesses,
and individuals, and to ensure that EU legislation is interpreted and applied uniformly in all EU
countries. It interprets the law in disputes arising among private individuals, businesses, and
governments. When a national court of a member state is unable to determine the law, it will
refer the matter for interpretation to the Court of Justice.
Judgments of the ECJ are decided by a majority and pronounced at a public hearing. Unlike
in the common law tradition, dissenting opinions are not expressed.
In 1989, a Court of First Instance was created to assist in handling the ECJ's workload and to
provide EU citizens with better legal protection. This court rules on actions brought by private
individuals, companies, and organizations, and it rules in cases that relate to competition law
and intellectual property. It is important to keep in mind that, in the context of trade, the ECJ
primarily deals with issues affecting intra-European trade. Any disputes related to trade between
the EU and non-EU states are taken up in other forums , such as the WTO, or through private
dispute-settlement mechanisms, such as the International Centre for Settlement of Investment
Disputes. That said, some legal issues related to trade are taken up by the ECJ, such as issues
related to European competition law.
The Court ofAuditors

The Court of Auditors, established in 1975, ensures that the EU budget is correctly implemented
and that sound financial management is practised. This court is completely independent of the

other EU institutions. The Court of Auditors provides the EU Parliament and the Council with
an annual audit report. It comprises one member from each EU country, appointed by the
Council for a renewable term of six years.
As evidenced by the discussion of the treaties above, the EU exists and evolves only by virtue
of agreements between member states. In the simplest terms, the treaties created an international
organization that is called the EU, whose initial goal was a durable peace. However, the EU has
evolved into a complex semi-state-like entity, or an entirely novel form of political organiza-
tion, and has met and exceeded its initial goal. The EU includes direct representation of citizens
through the EU Parliament, close coordination of national governments through the Council
and the Commission, and enforcement of the law through the ECJ, while reaching deep into
all aspects of the political, economic, and social lives of the 500 million people living in the EU
through the law-making and harmonization process. It is the most successful example of eco-
nomic and political integration in the world.
The next section discusses the trade and economic relations between the EU and Canada and
explores EU laws that Canadian businesses should be familiar with should they wish to enter
the EU market.
CETA and Canadian Business

The EU Commission negotiated CETA, with oversight from the EU Parliament and the Council,
on behalf of its 28 member states. The Canadian federal government together with represent-
atives from the provinces and territories were involved in the negotiations from Canada's side.
Following seven years of negotiations, CETA was signed on October 30, 2016, and entered into
force provisionally on September 21, 2017.
CETA is a landmark agreement meant to boost trade between Canada and the EU; diversify
Canada's exports and investments; and promote labour rights, environmental protection, and
sustainable development. It represents tremendous opportunities for business on either side of
the Atlantic. The following sections discuss what CETA is, what it covers, how it impacts busi-
nesses, and what "provisionally in force" means.
WhatCETA/s
CETA is a trade deal between the EU and Canada that establishes a free trade area in conformity
with Article XXIV of GATT 1994 and Article V of the GATS. However, it is more elaborate than
a simple agreement to eliminate all tariffs, since it encompasses the majority of economic issues
between Canada and the EU.
CETA is divided into thirty chapters and two protocols, as well as a number of annexes, and
covers issues relating to trade in goods, services, trade remedies, sanitary and phytosanitary
measures, investment, e-commerce, mutual recognition of professional qualifications, competi-
tion policies, subsidies, intellectual property, labour, the environment, and other matters.
What CETA Covers

With over 1,500 pages in the agreement and hundreds of pages in annexes and guides, CETA is
truly a comprehensive agreement and covers most aspects of Canada- EU economic relations, all
of which cannot be reviewed in this text. The aspects of CETA that will be discussed below are
• trade in goods,
• rules of origin,
• customs and trade facilitation,
• trade in services,
• investment protection, and
• government procurement.

CETA Chapter 2: Trade in Goods

Since the goal of any trade agreement is to spur trade, the existing tariffs and other trade bar-
riers have to be removed. CETA removes 98 percent of duties, taxes, and other import fees on
goods traded between the EU and Canada. An additional 1 percent will be phased out over a
seven-year period. Prior to CETA, only 25 percent of EU tariff lines on Canadian goods were
duty-free. This change will amount to approximately $880 million in saved duties per year once
all the tariff reductions are in effect. 24
Since both Canada and the EU member countries are members of the WTO, CETA had to
be drafted in conformity with all of the WTO agreements. In other words, the national treat-
ment and MFN as well as other WTO rules are imbedded and expanded on in CETA and the
EU, and Canadians can expect to trade in a non-discriminatory market for their goods and
services.
The EU is an economic and monetary union, and as such the member countries do not retain
their own external tariffs. This means that Canadian goods are subject to the same duty-free
treatment regardless of the country through which they enter the EU.
Duty-free treatment is applied to goods entering the EU based on the type of good and
whether it complies with CETA rules-of-origin requirements. The type of good is determined
BOX 4.3 Examples of Canadian Sectors Benefitting from CETA

The Canadian agricultural, forest, metal, fish, seafood, automo- vehicles annually to the EU under more liberal rules
tive, and oil and gas sectors benefit from CETA: of origin. However, since the EU is a major manufac-
turer and exporter of vehicles, the impact of duty-free
The agricultural sector. Goods such as maple syrup, treatment is likely to have a greater effect in Canada, as
frozen-potato products, cooking oils, lentils and grains, phasing out the 6.1 percent Canadian tariff over seven
and baked goods are duty-free. Other products, such years should make vehicles produced in EU more price-
as starches, will become duty-free by 2024. Pork and competitive in the Canadian market. This should provide
beef products are duty-free but subject to a quota. greater choice to Canadian consumers and make car
Canadian poultry and eggs, which are subject to a prices more competitive.
supply-management system, are excluded and remain The oil and gas sector: Canadian oil and gas products
protected under CETA. are tariff-free and quota-free (the previous EU tariff was
Forest products and metal products. Previously, EU tariffs as high as 8 percent), granting Canadian businesses an
on forest and metal products ranged from 1O percent to advantage over competing exports from countries such
12 percent. They are now duty-free, affording a competi- as Russia.
tive advantage to Canadian exporters over their US and
China counterparts.
Fish and seafood. Over 96 percent of Canadian fish and
seafood products are tariff-free, and the remainder will
become duty-free by 2024. Prior to implementation,
fish and seafood products were subject to between 11
percent and 25 percent in duties in the EU. This again
makes Canadian fish products more competitive, allow-
ing Canadian fish producers to export more to the EU
market free of hefty tariffs.
The automotive sector. EU tariffs are eliminated on all
Canadian auto parts and on some vehicles, such as road
tractors and firefighting vehicles. Tariffs on all remain-
ing types of vehicles will be phased out by 2024. Under
CETA, Canada will be able to export up to 100,000 Logging is one key area where Canada benefits from CETA.

by using the combined nomenclature, which uses the Harmonized Commodity Description
and Coding System (HS) along with additional subdivisions that are in use within the EU. The
way the CETA rules of origin are implemented in Canadian law and the HS system are discussed
in greater detail in Chapter 5. The section below highlights the CETA rules of origin25 and how
they apply to goods going from Canada to the EU.
Rules of Origin under CETA

Complex, globalized supply chains and varied production and assembly locations often make
it difficult to establish where a product comes from. Rules of origin are significant because
they will determine what tariff rates, if any, will apply to goods being imported into the EU or
Canada. The CETA Protocol on Rules of Origin and Origin Procedures (Protocol) sets out how
customs officials in the EU and Canada are to assess whether a product is "made in Canada'' or,
for example, "made in France:' The Protocol simplifies the rules of origin as compared to other
trade agreements. Some of CETA's more salient rules of origin are summarized in Box 4.4.
CETA Chapter 6: Customs and Trade Facilitation

CETA's customs and trade facilitation chapter26 aims to reduce transaction costs and increase
efficiency of customs processes while ensuring national security is not compromised. To this
end, the chapter includes provisions on transparency, release of goods, fees and charges, risk
management, automation, and review and appeal processes.
Pursuant to the transparency articles, the EU and Canada must publish online all regulations
governing all customs matters and any changes, making it more accessible to exporters and
importers.
BOX 4.4 CETA Rules of Origin
1. A good t hat has been wholly obtained in the EU or produced from imported wood, but as long as it is
Canada or has been produced exclusively from classified under a different HS heading and conforms to
originating materials wil l qualify for CETA tariff the PSRO it will be classified as an EU or Canadian
treatment. Goods that are "wholly obtained" in a country product eligible for duty-free treatment.
are generally natural products or made entirely from 3. In contrast to NAFTA, a regional-value-content approach
nat ural product s. Examples are harvested vegetables, is not used under CETA.
fru it, minerals, wood, and fish caug ht within Canadian 4. To qualify for CETA treatment, processing operations
or EU t erritorial wat ers. normally have to be carried out either in the EU or in
2. A good that is based on materials that do not originate Canada. However, Canadian producers can use materials
in the EU or Canada but were sufficiently produced in originating in the EU or Canada, and vice versa, to
the EU or Canada may quality for CETA tariff treatment if ensure compliance with the ru les. For example, a pencil
t he criteria for "sufficient production" is met. The criteria containing graphite from Sweden and basswood from
for determining sufficient production is described in Ontario would get preferential treatment.
Annex 5 to the Protocol, which lists product-specific 5. As a general rule, to receive preferential tariff treatment,
rules of origin (PSROs).27 A product that is produced EU-origin goods must be shipped directly from an EU
using materials not sourced in the EU or Canada can still country to Canada, and vice-versa, or transshipped
be considered o riginating in the EU or Canada if it through another country, as long as they remain under
satisfies the applicable PSRO. It is imperative to identify customs control and do not undergo any further
the correct HS classification number in order t o find the production.
appropriate PSRO. For example, flooring may be
combined nomenclature: the system of classification of goodswithin theEuropeanUnion forthe purpose of assessing tariff rates

The release-of-goods process is simplified for low-value and low-risk goods, and all goods can
be released at the first point of arrival in the importing country and without prior payment of
duties and taxes. With low-risk or no-risk goods, exporters can provide advance electronic sub-
mission for cargo reporting, release, and entry and accounting, thus expediting the release and
processing of shipments at customs. Pursuant to CETA, the EU and Canada will work toward
coordinating their various agencies to centralize import and export data and document require-
ments and verifications in a single location.
Both Canada and the EU ensure that all administrative actions and decisions made regarding
the import of goods can be promptly reviewed by judicial, arbitral, or administrative tribunals.
CETA Chapter 9: Trade in Services

As discussed in Chapter 2, trade in services refers to the production, distribution, marketing,
sale, and delivery of a service, including payment for and use of that service by a consumer
across borders.28 The exchange is in intangible products, like advice or expertise. The services
chapter in CETA reiterates Canada's and the EU's commitments to WTO's national treatment,
MFN treatment, and market access rules. The EU is the largest importer of services in the world,
and this chapter affords Canadian service providers the same treatment as local EU providers.
Mining, energy, environmental, engineering, and other professional Canadian service sectors are
likely to benefit greatly from CETA. Not all service sectors are included. The excluded service
sectors encompass public services such as health; public education; the collection, purification,
and distribution of water; and other social services, as well as cultural policies. This ensures that
governments remain free to enact the policies and programs based on their priorities and ob-
jectives in these fields.
The CETA market access obligation prohibits numerical limits on the number of service
suppliers, the total value of services transactions or assets, the total number of service oper-
ations or the total quantity of service output, or the total number of natural persons who may be
employed in a certain service sector.
CETA Chapter 8: Investment Protection

Direct investments by Canadian companies in the EU totalled $232 billion in 2016. In the same
year, direct investments from European companies in Canada totalled $247 billion, representing
30 percent of total foreign investments in Canada. Although investment is distinct and separate
from trade in goods or services, its economic importance to both Canada and the EU cannot
be ignored. As such, CETA (like NAFTA) includes a separate, comprehensive chapter on invest-
ment protection29 that seeks to facilitate increased investment between Canada and the EU by
giving investors greater market access, certainty, stability, transparency, and legal protection for
their investments.
To achieve these goals, CETA's investment chapter outlines broad market access, national
treatment and MFN provisions, and creates a new dispute-resolution tribunal to address dis-
putes arising between foreign investors and the states.
The provisions regarding establishment of investments prohibit Canada and the EU from
applying unjustified barriers on the entry into their markets of new investments. Specifically,
measures may not be adopted or maintained that restrict the number of enterprises that may
carry out an economic activity, the total value of transactions or assets, the number of oper-
ations or the total quantity of output, or the number of individuals that may be employed in a
particular sector. Additionally, the market access article specifies limits to government require-
ments that restrict the forms of legal entity an enterprise may take, such as a requirement for a
joint venture or the participation of foreign equity.
The non-discrimination section requires Canada and the EU to treat each other's investors
no less favourably than they treat any other investor in their territory. The investment protection

section grants investors protection from illegitimate government actions, such as denial of jus-
tice or of due process, or illegal expropriation. The reservations and exceptions section codifies
the ability of governments to act in the public interest when regulating in areas such as health,
safety, and the environment, as well as other sensitive policy areas, such as Indigenous affairs.
Additionally, CETA created an independent and transparent institutionalized dispute-settlement tri-
bunal, revised the process for selecting tribunal members, set out additional ethical requirements for
tribunal members, and provided for a unique appeal process and a robust enforcement mechanism.
The dispute-resolution system affords investors recourse to compensation when there is evi-
dence that an EU host state has breached its obligations, including those prohibiting discrimin-
ation or expropriation, and that the investor has suffered losses as a result.
CETA Chapter 19: Government Procurement

Canadian federal, provincial, and municipal governments and their EU counterparts purchase
goods and services domestically and abroad. Goods and services will be sourced, usually through
a public tendering process for government projects at any level, whether for the construction of a
school or a new highway. The EU's impressive $3.3 trillion per year in government purchasing
activity affords significant potential market opportunities to Canadian companies to bid on EU
projects. CETA expands on the WTO's Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA)JOrules
and opens greater market-access opportunities for Canadian and EU suppliers across all levels
of governments. Businesses benefit from rules regarding non-discrimination, impartiality, and
transparency in their procurement activities. Canadian and EU businesses can rest assured that
they are competing on an equal footing in another party's government procurement markets
when they bid on opportunities covered by CETA.
It is the first time Canadian businesses have guaranteed and secure access to opportunities
to supply their goods and services to EU regional and local governments as well as a wide range
of entities operating in the utilities sector. To determine if CETA applies to a particular pro-
curement activity at any level of government, EU and Canadian suppliers must refer to CETA
annexes. The applicable contract values at which CETA obligations are triggered are also speci-
fied in the annexes and range from $237,700 for goods to $9,221,026 for construction services. 31
These procurement thresholds are consistent with those that Canada applies in the WTO GPA.
CETA also provides additional provisions on topics including bidding timeframes, the registra-
tion process, screening, and supplier eligibility.
CETA Provisionally in Force

CETA is a comprehensive agreement, and some of its subject matter falls under both EU and
member states competencies. As such, it is considered a "mixed agreement"; EU institutions alone
cannot sign on behalf of all members on all issues. In order for the agreement to be fully applied, it
must be ratified by both the European Parliament and every single EU member state.32 All mem-
ber states have signed the agreement, allowing it to be provisionally applied and, as at the time of
writing, 13 members have completed the ratification process, leaving 15 who still need to do so. 33
Approximately 90 percent of the agreement already applies and benefits companies in Canada
and the EU. Areas that are not yet in force but will be following full ratification are
• investment protection,
• investment market access for portfolio investment, and
• the investment court system.
CETA rules are implemented across the EU. However, they are not the only relevant legal
provisions that will govern business transactions between Canadian and EU businesses. The
section below explores additional laws that Canadian businesses need to be aware of when doing
business within the EU and with EU companies.

European Union Legal Provisions Relevant to Canadian Business

For goods imported into the EU, the most important standards for businesses to be aware of are
those that pertain to product safety, technical standardization, packaging, and labelling.
Product Safety in the EU

Product safety for general products in the EU is governed by the General Product Safety Dir-
ective 2001/95/EC (GPSD). 34 Businesses importing products into the EU must ensure that the
products comply with the general safety requirements, that customers are warned of the risks
that the products might pose, and the appropriate precautions they should take when using the
products. Businesses also have the responsibility of notifying the appropriate authorities when
they become aware that a product has subsequently become dangerous. The definition of a safe
product is noted in Box 4.5.
Producers are required to place only safe products on the market, and a product will be
deemed safe if it conforms to community standards governing the safety of that product or,
in the absence of community standards, if it conforms to the standards of the member state in
whose territory it is marketed.35
Certain products have additional specific safety rules that must be applied, such as chemicals,
toys, personal protective equipment, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, machinery, and recreational craft.
BOX 4.5 Safe Product Definition
A safe product is defined under t he GPSD as being (ii) the effect on other products, where it is rea-
sonably foreseeable that it will be used with other
any product which, under normal or reasonably fore- products;
seeable conditions of use ... does not present any (iii) the presentation of the product, the label-
risk or only the minimum risks compatible with the ling, any warnings and instructions for its use and
product's use ... taking into account the following disposal, and any other indication or information
points in particular: regarding the product;
(iv) the categories of consumers at risk when using
(i) the characteristics of the product, includ-
the product, in particular children and the elderly.36
ing its composition, packaging, instructions for as-
sembly and, where applicable, for installation and A "dangerous product" is any product that does not meet
maintenance; this definition.37
BOX 4.6 The EU Bans the Sale of Non-Child-Resistant and Novelty Cigarette Lighters
At the time that t he European Commission considered this 9994) 38 in order to be sold in the EU. It directed that specific
issue, an estimated 1,500 to 1,900 injuries and 34 to 40 deaths technical requirements must be met in order for lighters to be
were occurring each year in the EU as a result of children play- excluded from the requirements of this standard and t hat no
ing with lighters and causing serious fires. Concerned about lighters may be placed for sale on the EU market that resemble
t hese statistics, and noting that many other countries, includ- objects that could be appealing to children, such as t oys, mo-
ing Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, al- bile phones, food, and cars. Additional technical specifications
ready had similar policies in place, the European Commission laid out the requirements for child-proof lighters pursuant to
banned the sale of non-child-resistant and novelty cigarette European Standard EN 13869:2002.39 As a result of t his deci-
lighters in 2008. This decision affected the sale of 98 percent sion of the European Commission, anyone wishing to import
of all lighters sold in the EU every year, requiring that they be lighters for sale in the EU must comply with the standard for
child-resistant and that they comply with the general safety re- lighter safety as well as the technical standards required for
quirements of the European standard on lighter safety (EN ISO child-resistant lighters.40

Product Liability
In 1985, the EU passed the Directive on Product Liability. A system of almost strict liability is
mandated by this directive, which has been widely perceived by American legal scholars to have
brought European law with respect to products closer to that of the United States and to exceed
the criteria for liability in Canada, which sets a lower standard for manufacturers and distribu-
tors. Changes to the 1985 directive are forthcoming.41 There is also the Machinery Directive
(2006),42 which expands the system of strict liability in the EU to protect the health and safety of
workers against risks of defective machinery. This directive should be considered in conjunction
with the Directive on General Product Safety mentioned above, which imposes a general duty
of safety on producers of consumer products.
Technical Standardization
Many products are required to adhere to certain technical standards in order to be sold in the
European market. Any products imported into the EU for sale and use therefore must also con-
form to those technical standards. The EU has been working toward harmonizing its technical
standards over the years, and in many industries harmonization has occurred.
Depending on the industry, European standards are set by one of three pan-European stan-
dards bodies: The European Committee for Standardization (CEN), The European Commit-
tee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC), and The European Telecommunications
Standards Institute (ITSI).
In order to determine whether a product meets the technical standard in question, a con-
formity assessment must take place. This process examines a product to determine whether it
complies-for example, in its design and production-with the requirements of the relevant
technical directive. This can be done by either the manufacturer or by third-p arty notified
bodies in EU member states. Mutual recognition agreements exist between the EU and Aus-
tralia, Canada, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the United States.43 CETA incor-
porates and expands on the Canadian and EU mutual recognition agreement. When a product
conforms with the technical standards of the EU and passes the relevant conformity assessment,
it will be marked with "CE;' which will allow the product to be placed on the market.
Packaging
Environmental and health requirements exist with respect to the packaging of goods in the
EU. Directives have been passed outlining rules for packaging and packaging waste, which re-
quire waste recovery of packaging by way of recycling programs and reuse programs. Packaging
must clearly indicate what materials were used in a good's production. According to the direc-
tive, businesses in the EU member states must keep the amount of packaging to a minimum,
for environmental reasons, and still maintain adequate safety and hygiene for consumers. They
must also reduce the amount of hazardous substances and materials in packaging material and,
wherever possible, create reusable or recoverable packaging. 44 Specific requirements also exist to
ensure that packaging of food products is safe.45
Labelling
Products sold in the EU must also comply with EU labelling requirements. Specific requirements
exist for food, household appliances, footwear, textiles, cosmetics, chemicals, detergents, and
strict liability: fromearly tort law, theimposition of theburden of compensationonthe person who had causedan injury, despite
the absence of any blameworthy conduct on their part; alsocal led liability without fault
notified bodies: third-party organizations accredited to carry out conformity assessmentswith harmonized European standards
or EuropeanTechnical Assessment

dangerous substances. Additional requirements exist for labelling related to ecolabels-a volun-
tary labelling system that identifies eco-friendly products, energy consumption and energy effi-
ciency, and fuel consumption and C02 emissions of new cars. 46 Each of these labelling regimes
is detailed, and it is beyond the scope of this textbook to outline their requirements.
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

Any good imported into the EU must comply with the EU's sanitary and phytosanitary require-
ments. Requirements exist in a number of sectors, including food and feed safety, animal health,
plant health, and public health.
Food and Feed Safety

The EU food and feed safety law47 is aimed at protecting human and animal life and health.
Food placed on the market must not be dangerous. Individuals or corporations defined as "oper-
ators" under the legislation are tasked with ensuring that the food legislation is respected by the
food-related business under their control. Operators have the responsibility to ensure that food
is traceable at all stages of the production, processing, and distribution process,4 8 and they also
have the responsibility to take the product off the market and inform the relevant authorities
when they become aware of potential hazards. When food or feed from a non-EU member
country poses a risk to human or animal health or to the environment, the European Com-
mission can suspend imports of that product. Additional rules exist for residues, pesticides,
veterinary medicines, and contaminants in and on food; genetically modified food and feed,
bio proteins, and novel foods; groups of food products (for example, mineral water, cocoa, and
quick-frozen food) and foodstuffs aimed at specific populations (for example, foods for infants
and young children); marketing and labelling requirements for feed materials, compound feed-
ingstuffs, and feedingstuffs intended for particular nutritional purposes; and materials intended
to come into contact with foodstuffs.49
Animal Health
A number of general rules apply to animals and animal products that are imported into the EU,
including the rules that the exporting country must be authorized to export the good into the
EU, the processing facility must be approved to import the product into the EU, and a health cer-
tificate signed by a veterinarian from the exporting company must accompany the animal and
animal products. Additionally, the products may be inspected at the border as they are imported
into the EU. 50 If an outbreak of disease in a non-EU member country poses a threat to animal
or public health, the EU can take temporary protective measures, including suspending imports
from that country. Under CETA, the parties can take precautionary measures in a more nuanced
way and temporarily restrict imports only with respect to a specific region where there may be
a threat and not the entire country.
Plant Health
Similar to the legislation on animal health, EU legislation on plant life and health requires that
products imported into the EU comply with certain sanitary and phytosanitary requirements.
Some products simply cannot be imported into the EU, while others require a plant health
certificate. All imports of plants may be subject to inspection upon arrival, and plants must
come from an importer that is authorized to import into the EU. All plant imports must also
be announced to the customs office of the point of entry prior to arrival. As is the case for ani-
mal products, should a plant or a plant product from a non-EU member country potentially
pose a risk to the EU, the member country or the Commission may take temporary emergency

measures. The EU Plant Health Directives 1 restricts the introduction of organisms that are harm-
ful to plants or plant products, and it covers the following:
• fruit, in the botanical sense, other than that preserved by deep freezing;
• vegetables, other than those preserved by deep freezing;
• tubers, corms, bulbs, and rhizomes;
• cut flowers;
• branches with foliage;
• cut trees retaining foliage; and
• plant tissue cultures.
Public Health
EU public health legislation is aimed at protecting EU citizens from major health threats. The
legislation provides for monitoring and controlling communicable diseases, controlling products
that lead to health issues, such as tobacco, and monitoring drug precursors.
EU, TBT, SPS, and International Commitments

Product standards and technical regulations are implemented to ensure the protection of human,
animal, or plant life or health, and protection of the environment. However, as tariffs are elim -
inated, technical standards and sanitary and phytosanitary measures may become a tool for
trading partners to block imports. The EU, like Canada and other countries, is free to make rules
regarding product safety as long as they are not meant to create obstacles to trade. The EU's laws
must comply with its WTO's Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, Agreement on the
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures obligations, and any additional rules
under regional trade agreement obligations.
For instance, SPS and TBT rules were one of the most significant barriers to Canadians seek-
ing to do business in the EU. CETA includes a chapter on TBTs (Chapter 4) and a chapter on SPS
(Chapter 5), and their provisions ensure the EU's and Canada's standards are not used illegally
to stymie trade, are transparent, and are streamlined to accept mutually recognized health and
safety assessments for certain products.
Intellectual Property Law

Since the EU is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the
WTO, it is, therefore, a signatory to the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS) agreement.52 In addition to provisions in the TRIPS and WIPO agreements that apply
to the EU, the EU has passed a number of directives regarding various aspects of intellectual
property protection.
Copyright Protection in the EU

The duration of copyright in the EU is set at the life of the author plus 70 years pursuant to the
Council Directive 93/83/EEC of September 27, 1993,53 which coordinates certain rules relating to
copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmis-
sion. The protection of moral rights has not been addressed by EU directives related to copyright
and is left to national legislation. Efforts made by the EU on the issue of copyright have created sep-
arate legislation: directives on the protection of computer programs, resale rights, copyright in the
information society, protection of databases, satellite and cable, rental rights, and semiconductors.
Patent Protection in the EU

Patent protection in the EU can be granted either by way of national patents in EU member
states or by way of European patents that are granted by the European Patent Office. In 2013,

legislation creating a unitary patent protection in the EU came into force; however, as of the
time of writing the system is yet to be implemented. The new system creates a single patent that
provides legal title to a patented invention across 26 of the EU member states (Spain and Croatia
chose not to participate).54 This system is expected to be in effect sometime in 2020.55
Trademark Protection in the EU

Like patents, trademarks can be registered at the national level or by way of an EU trademark
(EUTM) . Registering a trademark as "EUTM" protects the mark in all member states of the
EU. Trademarks in the EU are governed by the Trade Mark Directive and the Regulation on the
European Union Trade Mark.56 EU trademarks are issued for ten years and can be renewed for
successive ten-year terms. At the EU level, no protection is available to unregistered trademarks,
while at the member-state level some protections are afforded.
Geographical Indications in the EU

Given the extent of agricultural production in EU member states, geographical indications (Gis)
are of great importance to the EU. Many European Gis are commonplace, such as "Champagne;'
"Scotch whiskey;' "Cognac;' and "Roquefort cheese:' Because the EU is a signatory to the TRIPS
agreement, the rules contained within it pertaining to geographical indications apply. The EU
is also continuing to negotiate recognition for its geographical indications on a bilateral basis
through individual trade agreements. For example, under CETA, the EU successfully included
GI protections for a number of products like the Italian Parma dry cured ham "Prosciutto di
Parma:' "Parma;' as a name for a product class, cannot be used by any other producer in Canada.
Similarly, pursuant to CETA, Canadian producers may use the names "Asiago;' "fontina;' "Gor-
gonzola;' "Munster;' and "feta'' only if they appear with the qualifiers "imitation;' "style;' "kind;'
or the like in the labelling.
Enforcing EU Intellectual Property Rights

Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council lays out the ways
in which the customs authorities of EU member states may intervene in the event they believe
that goods entering the EU may violate intellectual property rights. In 89 percent of the cases in
which goods were detained, the goods were either destroyed after ( 1) the owner of the goods and
the rights-holder agreed on destruction or (2) after a court case was commenced by the rights-
holder for infringement of its intellectual property rights.57
BOX 4.7 Role of Customs in Enforcing EU Intellectual Property Law

Customs authorities play a significant role in the enforcement of EU intellectual property law as it
relates to counterfeit goods and pirated works brought into EU member states, which is happening
in an increasingly significant number of instances. In 2018, more than 30 million articles were sus-
pected by customs of violating intellectual property rights. 58 In 2017, 40,000 detention cases were
registered by customs, with the main source country of these products being China.59 Foodstuffs
accounted for 24 percent of articles detained at customs, followed by toys, cigarettes, and clothing.60
While customs agencies can take the initiative to seize goods bel ieved to be counterfeit, procedures
also exist for the rights-holders to file an application for action in the event that they believe their
intellectual property rights are being infringed.
Different customs rules apply to goods in transit through the EU; however, a case discussed below
(see Box 4.8) makes it clear that, under certain circumstances, goods in transit through the EU may be
inspected at the same level of scrutiny vis-a-vis intellectual property laws as are goods destined for
the EU market.

BOX 4.8 Case Highlight
Counterfeit Goods
Case Names and Court Decision
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Customs authorities may stop counterfeit or fake goods, but
Company and Others (European Court of Justice, 2011) and there must be more than mere suspicion that the goods will
Nokia Corporation v Her Majesty's Commissioners of Revenue enter the EU market. This threshold may be met where the
(European Court of Justice, 2011 )61 operators are about to direct their goods toward EU custom-
ers or if they have disguised their commercial intentions. Com-
Facts mercial intentions may be found to have been disguised if the
In these two cases, counterfeit goods were seized as they were destination of the goods is not declared, if there is missing in-
passing through member states of the EU on their way to their formation about the identity or address of the manufacturer
final destination. In the Philips case, pirated electric shavers or consignor of the goods, if there is a lack of cooperation with
were found in the port of Antwerp with no final destination the customs authorities, or if information obtained through
specified. Philips requested that these devices be destroyed. In documents or correspondence indicates that the goods are li-
the Nokia case, counterfeit mobile phones were seized at Lon- able to be diverted to EU customers.
don's Heathrow airport en route from Hong Kong to Colombia.
EU rules of customs provide for certain procedures to be fol- Analysis/Application
lowed for goods in transit through the EU with a final destina- Counterfeit goods may be stopped by EU customs authorities
tion of a non-EU member country. However, in order for these even where they are destined for non-EU countries.
rules to apply, the goods may not actually enter the EU market.
Issue
Can the goods be destroyed by the customs authority even
though they were only passing through the EU en route to an-
other country that is not an EU member state?
EU and International IP Commitments

Through CETA and in addition to their international treaties' commitments, Canada and the EU
made specific guarantees for copyright, trademarks, designs, patents, geographical indications,
and plant varieties, as well as for intellectual property enforcement measures. Examples include
an additional period of protection for eligible pharmaceutical products, eight years of protection
for data filed with regulators as part of a regulatory approval process, ten years of protection for
plant-protection products (for example, pesticides), and provision for court injunction enforce-
ment options.
Competition Law
Competition law has always been of central importance to the EU. It involves such sensitive areas
as national regulatory goals, market power, and political strategy. European competition policy
rests on two main rules set out in the TFEU. 62 First, Article 101 of the TFEU prohibits agree-
ments between two or more independent market operators which restrict competition. 63 This
provision covers both vertical agreements and horizontal agreements. A vertical agreement is
an agreement made between parties that are at different levels of the production process, such
as a distribution agreement between a manufacturer and a retailer or agent. Vertical restraint
agreements vary widely in their terms and their effect; however, some of these agreements will
be found by the European Commission to violate the terms of Article 101.
vertical agreement: an agreement made between parties who are at different levels of theproduction process, such as adistribu-
tion agreement between amanufacturer and aretailer or agent

A horizontal agreement is an agreement between competing firms in the same industry that
may result in reduced competition-for example, common pricing policies, common produc-
tion quotas, and information sharing. The creation of a cartel between competitors, which may
involve price-fixing and/or market sharing, is an example of the most egregious illegal conduct
breaching Article 101.
The second principal rule articulated in Article 102 of the TFEU prohibits firms that hold
a dominant position in a given market to abuse that position-for example by charging unfair
prices, by limiting production, or by refusing to innovate to the prejudice of consumers.64
Article 101: Concerted Market Behaviour

This provision generally prohibits concerted market practices "which may affect trade between
Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion
of competition within the common markef'6s The provision enumerates specific market activ-
ities of particular concern-namely, price-fixing, limitations on production, market sharing,
discrimination among parties, and tie-ins.
Particularly worrying to the Commission is an exclusive distribution agreement whereby the
producer agrees to supply the product only to a particular distributor within a particular terri-
tory, often buttressed by attempts to prevent third parties from selling into the contract territory
of the designated distributor. The use of export bans that prohibit a distributor from export-
ing the product outside a designated area will be judged particularly severely, as will any other
attempt to establish absolute territorial protection for a distributor. If a firm is contemplating
an exclusive distribution agreement, legal advice should be sought because an exemption may
be required. A firm may qualify either for a block exemption or for an individual exemption.
The article addresses only joint or collusive conduct as opposed to the conduct of a single
actor. One of the major goals of Article 101 is to preserve the single European market and to
prevent its fragmentation into single-country markets.
Single-Country Market
Case Names and Court prices than Consten had set. Consten sued UNEF in France, and
Consten & Grundig v European Commission (European Court of the case was referred to the ECJ.
Justice, 1966)66
Issue
Facts Can a manufacturer restrict imports and exports of its products
The German company Grundig appointed the French com- within the common market by imposing territorial prohibitions
pany Consten as its exclusive dealer for Grundig products in and limitations on its dealers?
France, the Saar, and Corsica. Consten undertook not to sell
Decision
products that would compete with Grundig products and not
to export the Grundig products directly or indirectly to any The Court held that such restrictions are a violation of the
other countries. Grundig had appointed dealers in other Euro- Treaty of Rome and that artificial national divisions of the com-
pean countries and had imposed similar restrictions on them. mon market are prohibited. The cou rt concluded that para l-
Another French company, UNEF, bought Grundig products lel imports are valuable because they reduce national price
from a German dealer and sold them in France at cheaper differences.
horizontal agreement: an agreement between com peting firms in the same industry, which may result in reduced competi-
tion- for example, common pricing policies, common production quotas, and information sharing
block exemption: an exemption availablefor generic types of agreements, including specialization agreements, research and
development agreements, vertical restraint agreements, technology-transfer agreements, andfranchising agreements

The T-Mobile Case

Case Names and Court Decision
T-Mobile Netherlands BVand Others (European Court of Justice, The court concluded that the single meeting among competi-
2009)67 tors influenced the conduct of the market and that this was a
violation of Article 101 of the TFEU.
Facts
In 2001, five operators in the Netherlands had their own mo- Analysis/Application
bile telephone network. They met once to discuss the reduc- It is unlawful under Article 101 ofTFEU for companies to inter-
tion of commissions paid to dealers for concluding postpaid fere in the natural workings of the market by coordinating their
subscription agreements with consumers, which were to take actions. A single meeting between companies may constitute
effect in September 2001. a concerted practice in breach of community competition law.
Issue
Did the behaviour of the five mobile telephone network oper-
ators amount to a concerted practice?
Exemption from the Application of Article 101

Agreements that on their face are violations of Article 101 may be eligible for exemption . Al-
though an individual exemption may be sought from the European Commission, this is an
expensive undertaking and not to be embarked upon lightly. The philosophy of the Commis-
sion is that, to qualify for exemption, an agreement that restricts competition must contribute
to the improvement of production or distribution or promote technical and economic progress
and constitute an improvement on the situation that would not otherwise exist. Block exemp-
tions are available for generic types of agreements. Agreements that come within the terms of a
block exemption do not need to be notified and approved by the Commission. Block exemptions
are available in a number of areas, including specialization agreements, research and develop-
ment agreements, vertical restraint agreements, technology transfer agreements, and franchising
agreements. Expert legal advice is required for a firm contemplating such agreements in the EU.
Article 102: Control of Market Power

While Article 101 addresses the concerted behaviour of two or more firms, Article 102
addresses the behaviour of a single, dominant firm that abuses its m arket power. The provision
does not prohibit m arket power or monopoly in itself; rather, it prohibits the abuse of m arket
power. The Google case discussed in Box 4.11 is an example of how the EU Commission has
dealt with this issue.
The EU Merger Regulation

A merger is an agreement between two or more companies to combine their businesses into
one entity on a permanent basis. Merger transactions have become prevalent in today's busi-
ness world and are commonly done to enter a new market or gain market share. The goal of
merger laws is to enable competition authorities to regulate market changes due to these trans-
actions. Merger oversight allows the authorities to identify mergers that distort competition in
the market while allowing mergers that provide substantial efficiencies to go ahead. Unlike the

Google's Anti-Competitive Behaviour in EU

Case Name and Adjudicative Body comparison-shopping services on its Google search-engine re-
Google Search (Shopping), European Commission6B sults page. This stifled competition and allowed Google's com-
parison-shopping service to make significant gains in t raffic at
Facts the expense of its rivals and to the detriment of European con-
In all EU countries, Google's search engine has held a domin- sumers. In 2017, the Commission fined Google €2.42 billion.
ant market share that exceeds 90 percent.69 In 2004, Google To calculate the fine, the Commission took into consideration
entered the EU market with a new product for comparison the duration and gravity of the anti-competitive behaviour and
shopping called "Froogle;' later renamed "Google Shopping'.'70 revenue gained by Google at the expense of its competitors.72
At that time there were already a number of established play-
ers offering online comparison shopping to EU customers. Analysis/Application
Google's comparison-shopping service w as not performing Google's self-favouring behaviour is enough to establi sh abuse
well, and in 2008 Google changed its marketing strategy by and a contravention of Article 102 ofTFEU. Google's conduct
placing "Google Shopping" at the top of its search results while was sufficiently capable of causing harm, including driving
demoting its competitors.71 Google's algorithm started prefer- competitors out of business, reducing incentives to in novate
ring its own services while reducing the quality of information and consumer choice, and leading to higher prices. However,
provided to consumers on Google Shopping competitors. algorithms and their design are complex and often beyond
the understanding of most people.73 Algorithms continuously
Issue change themselves and adapt in the way that thei r designers
Does the more favourable positioning and di splay by Google, cannot explain, with the result that it is uncertain whether
in its general search-results pages, of its own comparison- Google's self-favouring bias was actually d esigned to drive
shopping service compared to competing comparison-shop- competitors out of the EU market.74 Technological com panies
ping services infringe Article 102 ofTFEU? would be wise to assess how their algorithmic design may im-
pact competition and whether the EU's anti-trust rules would
Decision be triggered.
The Commission found that Google had abused its mar-
ket power by failing to provide equal treatment to rival
anti-competition rules contained in the TFEU treaties, the current EU competition law regime
is contained in Regulation 139/2004.75 Pursuant to Regulation 139/2004, any merger with an
EU dimension that significantly impedes effective competition in the common market or a
substantial part of it, in particular as a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant
position, is prohibited. In other words, Regulation 139/2004 sets a three-part test for what is
considered a prohibited merger transaction . The elements of the test are the (1) m erger trans-
action, (2) EU dimension, and (3) significant impediment of effective competition, in particular,
through strengthening or creation of a dominant position.
A merger is defined as a situation where two or more undertakings on the market combine
into one or where one or more undertakings on a market acquire control over another one.
The second element is jurisdictional, which addresses whether the EU or the member state's
merger rules apply. An EU law can apply only where a merger has an impact beyond the borders
of a national state; this is established by looking at the quantitative effect of the transaction.
When a merger reaches the EU's financial turnover threshold, as set out in Article 1 of the
Regulation, the EU has jurisdiction. If a merger reaches the quantitative threshold, the European
Commission needs to be notified of the details of the transaction. In contrast, where a merger
transaction does not reach the EU threshold but does meet the national thresholds, all relevant
national competition authorities may need to be notified. This means there are still numerous

mergers that do not need to be notified to the commission or to the national competition au-
thorities, because the companies involved in these mergers are too small.
The third element of the test assesses whether effective competition will be significantly
impeded by the merger. Through economic analysis, the Commission weighs the harmful
effects on competition against the benefits of the merger. One way a merger can be harmful
to competition is by reducing the number of players on the market that compete in the same
industry. A merger can also be detrimental if, through the transaction, one company absorbs
another company and the new entity then is able to control the entire supply-chain process
of a product or service. If the new company starts charging higher prices for the produc-
tion inputs of competitors or limits, denies access, or raises the cost of access by other non-
integrated competitors, this will be harmful to consumers and potentially stifle development.
However, these transactions can have substantive positive effects, too. For example, the com-
bination of two companies can lead to cost savings. These savings can be translated into less-
expensive products, which benefits consumers. The Commission must evaluate each merger
transaction on its own merits, with a view to balancing the interests of the companies and any
detrimental effects on the market.
Brexit and the EU

"Brexit" is a shorthand term that combines the words "Britain" and "exit" and refers to the pro-
cess of the United Kingdom leaving the EU. 76 The following section discusses how Brexit works
and how it affects the EU and Canada.
What Is Brexit?
In 2016, by way of referendum, the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. After the UK trig-
gered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets out how an EU country may voluntarily leave
the union, the European Commission and the UK started the arduous task of negotiating how to
undo decades of integration. In October 2019, the EU and the UK approved a revised withdrawal
agreement and a political declaration on future EU - UK relations. The Withdrawal Agreement
is limited in scope, covering only a 12-month transition period during which the UK and the
EU will negotiate a new trade relationship, how much money the UK owes the EU for leaving,
and what happens to UK citizens living in the EU and EU citizens living in the UK. It also sets
out a method of avoiding the return of a physical Northern Ireland border. The UK Parliament
ratified the Withdrawal Agreement.
The transition period allows the UK and the EU to renegotiate thousands of regulations
that govern trade, investment, security, immigration, and other matters that are currently
imbedded in the EU framework. During the transition period, all EU laws would still apply,
which will allow businesses and governments to adjust to the legislative, economic, and
social changes that the exit will bring once the new legislative and regulatory changes are
implemented.
However, the UK may also depart without a deal at the end of the transition period ending in
December 2020, which would mean leaving without formal arrangements in place for the future
relationship between the EU and the UK and immediate termination of the application of all EU
regulations as they concern the UK.
A no-deal Brexit could lead to significant disruptions:
• border checks could be reintroduced,

• transport and trade between the UK and the EU could be severely affected,
• adults may not be able to drive in EU countries without a special driving permit, and
• it could cost more money for British residents travelling in the EU to use a cell phone in
EU countries.

Chapter 4 The European Union and Other Regional Trade Arrangements 11 9
Business Implications of Brexit

There are over 80,000 pages of agreements between the EU and the UK. Untangling and re-
negotiating these agreements is a costly and uncertain process and affects businesses in countless
ways. This section highlights some business implications of Brexit.
Business thrives when the legislative framework is favourable and stable. Businesses are still
unsure what Brexit will mean for market access, the availability of migrant labour, and prod-
uct regulation. This uncertainty has caused a reduction in investment and employment growth
because businesses are reluctant to expand.77 The UK's own long-term economic assessment
illustrates a decrease in GDP in the event of a deal or no-deal Brexit scenario.78
Almost half of all the UK's overseas investment comes from the EU, as does a similar pro-
portion of its export revenues. Brexit invariably affects both the long- and short-term business
and investment decisions of UK-based foreign companies. Many companies, such as Panasonic,
Honda, Discovery Channel, Sony, and others, are moving their European headquarters from the
UK to mainland Europe to minimize the potential disruption Brexit may cause to their oper-
ations in the EU.79
Upon leaving the EU, the UK would no longer benefit from the single market and would
have to renegotiate new trade and investment agreements with the EU. Should the UK exit the
EU without a transition period, it will trade on the MFN basis under WTO laws. This will mean
millions of tariffs and other duties will apply to UK products entering the EU. Additionally, the
UK, as part of the EU, benefits from the EU's free trade agreements worldwide. Upon leaving
the EU, if the UK wishes to continue trading on a preferential basis with countries like Canada,
Japan, and Chile, it will have to negotiate its own free trade agreements with these partners. UK
businesses will likely lose the advantage afforded by the preferential trading terms of the EU's
existing trade agreements, and UK products will likely be less competitive abroad.
Reasons for Brexit

There are numerous complex reasons behind the UK's decision to leave the EU. The integration
process within the EU has had both positive and negative impacts on people in the EU and the
UK. The positive features are often taken for granted, while the negative aspects are highlighted
and produce a strong, visceral reaction in many EU citizens. For instance, the benefits of open
borders when they travel and of being able to enjoy cheap cell phone services within the EU
are seen as a simple convenience. Others may have seen the market integration and increase in
competition eliminate their jobs and lay the blame at the feet of the EU. The negative aspects of
long- and short-term migration into the UK, Eurozone instability, and inefficiencies due to the
organizational structure of the EU are among the chief reasons cited for supporting Brexit. Many
Brexiteers feel that the UK is better suited to tailor laws and regulations that address modern
problems on their own rather than in a multilateral setting that cedes a lot of their sovereignty
to the EU.
The inability of the EU institutions to address political debate and transparently address the
trade-offs that exist in working together also led to growing discontent in the UK and other EU
member states. Despite economic growth and development and improved security and environ-
mental protection, there is a rise of populist and protectionist trends in the EU. The continued
success of the EU will depend on its institutional ability to change and address the concerns of
the member states.
Other Regional Trade Arrangements

The first years of the 2lst century have witnessed an enormous proliferation of bilateral and
multilateral trading arrangements. This reflects the relative ease of reaching an agreement when
there are a few parties compared to the daunting task of achieving consensus among all the
members of the WTO. The difficulty of consensus is the chief reason that progress in the Doha

Round of trade talks has been so disappointing. The movement toward bilateral free trade agree-
ments has been much criticized by trade policy analysts as creating a 'spaghetti bowl of agree-
ments' with conflicting provisions that may have the effect of delaying multilateral negotiations
that would eventually achieve freer trade worldwide. Closely related to the phenomenon of
bilateral free trade agreements is the growth of regional free trade agreements. Like Canada,
the United States, and Mexico, which were able to sign a trilateral trade agreement in the face of
disappointing progress in the Uruguay Round, many nations are taking advantage of the geog-
raphy, culture, and customs they share to reach agreement on regional free trade. The status of
these agreements is continually changing, and any list or description of the current state of these
agreements is bound to be out of date almost immediately. A representative sample of these im-
portant arrangements follows.
Canada
Recognizing the importance of trade to Canada's growth and prosperity, the federal government
is actively pursuing new trade relationships worldwide. Canada has 15 free trade agreements in
force as ofJuly 2019 (see table 4.2 for the full list), has 9 agreements in the negotiation stage and
5 agreements in the exploratory stage. so
The CPTPP is the most recent and important agreement concluded and in force. Full dis-
cussion of the CPTPP is beyond the scope of this chapter; however, it is worth noting that the
CPTPP closely resembles the structure and benefits of CETA, as it was modelled after the latter.
The CPTPP grants Canadian companies access to a market representing 495 million people and
a combined GDP of $13.5 trillion and eliminates 98 percent of trade barriers.81
The Americas
The list of free trade agreements negotiated by the various countries in Latin America is exten-
sive. The past 25 years have seen considerable trade liberalization and broader economic policy
reform in Latin America. So far, Latin America has approached freer trade through regional-
ism, characterized by the creation of subregional preferential agreements that remain open to
new members and whose members remain free to pursue other agreements. Numerous bilateral
agreements have also been reached, resulting in a complex and expanding matrix of diverse
trade and economic treaty arrangements. Thus, we presently have, in addition to NAFTA and the
CPTPP, free trade agreements among Colombia, Mexico, and Venezuela, as well as the bilateral
trade agreements signed by Mexico with Chile, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Peru, and the
Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras). Outside of Latin America, Mexico
has signed trade agreements with the European Union, Israel, and Japan. A host of other bilateral
trade agreements exist among Latin American countries and between Latin American countries
and non-Latin American countries. Notably, China has signed bilateral trade agreements with
Chile, Costa Rica, and Peru, and Japan has bilateral trade agreements with Chile, Mexico, and
Peru. In addition to its agreement with Mexico, the EU has signed a bilateral trade agreement
with Chile.
In addition, there is the free trade agreement between the Central American countries and
the Dominican Republic, and the bilateral free trade agreements between the Caribbean Com-
munity (CARICOM) and Costa Rica, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic.
Latin America also has two customs unions: Mercosur, which includes Argentina, Bra-
zil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela; and the Andean Community, which includes Bolivia,
Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Additionally, there are a number of other institutions and
subregional economic integration initiatives like the Pacific Alliance, which includes Chile,
Colombia, Mexico, and Peru, with which Canada is currently negotiating a free trade agree-
ment that will allow it to become an associate member to the trade bloc.82 Another is the

TABLE 4.2 Canada's Free Trade Agreements as of 2019

Agreement Name Country Grouping In Force Since
Com prehensive and Progressive Agreement Austra lia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Japan, 2018-12-30
for Trans-Pacifi c Partnership (CPTPP) Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singa-
pore, Vietnam
Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement Chile 1997-07-05
Canada-Colombia Free Tra de Agreement Colombia 2011 -08-15
Canada-Costa Rica Free Trade Agreement Costa Rica 2002-11-01
Canada-European Free Trade Association European Free Trade Associat ion 2009-07-01
(EFTA) Free Trade Agreement (EFTA): Iceland, Li echtenstein, Norway,
Switzerland
Cana da-European Union: Comprehensive European Union (EU): Austria, Belgium, 2017-09-21
Economic and Trade Ag reement (CETA) Bulgaria, Croat ia, Cyprus, t he Czech
Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germa ny, Greece, Hu ngary, Ireland, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the
Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Roman ia,
the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Swe-
den, the United Kingdom
Canada-Honduras Free Trade Ag reement Honduras 2014-10-01
Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Israel 1997-01-01

(CIFTA)
Canada-Jordan Free Trad e Ag reement Jordan 2012-10-01
Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement Sout h Korea 2015-01-01

(CKFTA)
North American Free Trade Ag reement North America: Mexico, United States of 1994-01 -01
(NAFTA) America, Canada
Canada-Panama Free Trade Agreement Panama 2013-04-01
Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Peru 2009-08-01
Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Ag reement Ukraine 2017-08-01

(CUFTA)
Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) United St ates of America (superseded by 1989-01-01
NAFTA: 1994-01 -01)
Forum for the Progress of South America (Prosur), created in April 2019, which includes
Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, and Peru, whose goal is to
establish a coordination mechanism that will support democracy and market economy among
the member states.83
The United States is a party to 20 free trade agreements and an influential trade partner. His-
torically, the US has had a policy of aggressively pursuing ambitious trade agreements. How-
ever, in light of the change in administration in 2016, the US withdrew its participation in the
CPTPP and is loath to pursue multilateral trade agreements, opting to negotiate strictly on a
bilateral basis.

Europe
The EU has been very active in the pursuit of regional and bilateral free trade agreements and,
as of 2019, it has 38 free trade agreements in force with countries as disparate as Egypt, Chile,
Mexico, and South Africa and over 42 provisionally in force agreements with countries like
Kazakhstan, Cameroon, and Madagascar.84 Negotiations are under way with the United States,
the Philippines, New Zealand, Myanmar, Indonesia, China, and others. Negotiations that had
begun with the Gulf Cooperation Council (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and
the UAE) have been on hold since 2008.8 5
Several Central European countries that are not members of the EU have come together to
create the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) 2006,86 which came into force in
2007. Member countries include Albania; Bosnia and Herzegovina; the Republic of Moldova;
Montenegro; Serbia; Macedonia; and UNMIK/Kosovo. Finally, the Eurasian Economic Union
(EEU) is a limited customs union between Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, Kyr-
gyzstan, and Armenia in effect since 2015. The EEU has harmonized its external customs tariffs,
abolished the internal customs borders, provided for greater labour movement, and transferred
some of the decision-making about tariffs to the Union level.
Asia
The Association of South East Asian Nations
The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) was established in 1967 with the Bangkok
Declaration. 87 The original members comprised Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore,
and Thailand. Brunei Darussalam became the sixth member in 1984, and Vietnam the seventh
in 1995. Lao PDR and Myanmar joined in 1997; Cambodia joined in 1999. At the time of for-
mation, the members were reluctant to cede powers to the association, preferring to maintain a
high level of individual sovereignty. For this reason, ASEAN has a flexible and loose structure.
Even with subsequent improvements in the structure, ASEAN remains an intergovernmental
regional organization with no supranational law-making powers. The aims and purposes of the
association are ( 1) to accelerate economic growth, social progress, and cultural development in
the region and (2) to promote regional peace and stability through abiding respect for justice
and the rule oflaw in the relationship among countries in the region and adherence to the prin-
ciples of the United Nations Charter. Economic cooperation in ASEAN has been slow to develop
because of the dominance of national interests. Increasingly, however, Asian nations are deciding
to cooperate to create freer trade within the region.
ASEAN Plus Three is an initiative to integrate China, Japan, and South Korea into the ASEAN
framework. This was followed by the East Asian Summit, which includes these three countries
as well as India, Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Russia. The Regional Com-
prehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a free trade agreement that was being negotiated
at the time of writing between all 10 ASEAN member states and their partners: China, Japan,
South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India. The RCEP agreement, when finalized, would
encompass 30 percent of global gross domestic product and 3.5 billion people, overshadowing
the CPTPP. 88
The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA)

In 1992, the leaders of ASEAN agreed to establish an ASEAN free trade area (AFTA) within
15 years of January 1, 1993. The primary instrument for implementing AFTA is the Common
Effective Preferential Tariff Scheme (CEPT). The CEPT requires that, once all countries accept
that a specific good is to be covered under the CEPT, all member countries give the preferential
tariff. Although unprocessed agricultural products were originally excluded from this scheme,
member countries agreed in 1994 to phase such products into the CEPT scheme. All ten ASEAN
member countries are part of AFTA. Additionally, ASEAN has concluded free trade agreements

with China, Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and India and is currently in the process of
negotiating a free trade agreement with the EU.
The Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation

The Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is a loosely confederated group born of the
Asia- Pacific Conference in 1993. APEC had 21 member countries at the time of writing, including
Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the United States, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, China, Mexico,
Papua New Guinea, Chile, Peru, Russia, and Vietnam, and operates as a cooperative, multilateral
economic and trade forum with the goal of promoting growth and accelerating regional economic
integration.
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and the South Asian Free
TradeArea
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) comprises India, Pakistan,
Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, the Maldives, and Afghanistan. The purpose of the or-
ganization is to promote economic, social, and cultural cooperation among the member states.
To that end, SAARC negotiated a free trade agreement among its members and established the
South Asian Free Trade Area in 2004. Since it took effect, the member states have progressively
moved toward harmonization of packaging, marking, and labelling requirements and the elim-
ination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade.
Africa
While there are associations of countries in Africa, they have tended to have political, rather
than economic, underpinnings. Some of these associations are described below.
The Agadir Treaty

The Agadir Treaty (Agadir) created a free trade area between Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, and Tuni-
sia in 2004; in 2016, Lebanon and Palestine joined the trade area. Agadir dismantles customs;
liberalizes trade, including agricultural products; provides for technical assistance to support
small- and medium-sized firms; and includes rules for government procurement and intellec-
tual property rights, common standards and specifications, and mechanisms to resolve conflicts
between member states. Trade among member states is relatively modest due to their political
and market fragmentation.
The Customs and Economic Union of Central Africa

The Customs and Economic Union of Central Africa, an association of French-speaking Afri-
can nations that includes Cameroon, the Central African Republic, the Republic of the Congo,
Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon, was established in 1966. Also known by its French name, Union
Douaniere et Economique de l'Afrique Centrale (UDEAC), this group formed a customs union
among its members. UDEAC signed a treaty for the establishment of the Economic and Mon-
etary Community of Central Africa (CEMAC) to promote the entire process of subregional
integration, and it agreed to a monetary union, with the Central African franc as a common
currency. UDEAC was officially superseded by CEMAC in June 1999.
The East African Community

Initiated in 1999 and formerly known as the East African Customs Union, the East African
Community (EAC) is an association of East African countries. Progress on the EAC Customs
Union Protocol has been slow; however, the union "began operations" in January 2005.

The Economic Community of West African States

Formed in 1975, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is an association
of 15 West African countries. Several ECOWAS members have formed a customs union and
apply a common external tariff as well as cooperate on taxation and other economic matters.
The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)

On May 30, 2019, the AfCFTA entered into force for the 24 out of 54 African countries that
had ratified the free trade agreement, and trading under the terms of the treaty will start on
July 1, 2020.89 If successful, the AfCFTA will create the largest free trade area since the creation
of the WTO and will bring together 1.2 billion people and achieve a combined gross domestic
product (GDP) of more than $2 trillion.90 In the meantime, three customs unions are in force
in Africa. These are the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), the Southern
African Customs Union (SACU), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC),
a regional economic community of 16 states.
The Middle East

In the context of the current global movement toward integration through bilateral and mul-
tilateral trade agreements, the Middle East is notable for its absence of activity. Although the
United States and the EU are actively seeking bilateral agreements with various Middle Eastern
countries, there is little initiative emanating from the region itself.
The Council of Arab Economic Unity

The Council of Arab Economic Unity (CAEU) was created in 1964 to implement the Arab
Economic Unity Agreement among the states of the Arab League. Its 18 members are Algeria,
Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the UAE, and Yemen. The ultimate goal of the CAEU is to achieve
complete economic unity among the member states. In 1997, the Greater Arab Free Trade Area
(GAFTA) came into effect, and all 18 member states of CAEU are a part of it. Yemen and Sudan,
however, have yet to implement it.
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

Established in 1981, the GCC is a political and economic alliance made up of Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman. 91 The GCC passed an agreement establishing a
customs union among the six countries in 2015, which means that these countries adopt a com-
mon customs tariff with external countries and enjoy free trade among themselves.
Australia
The first trade agreement in this region was the Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement
(CER) between Australia and New Zealand, a WTO -consistent trade agreement that came into
force in 1983. As of writing, Australia has 11 free trade agreements in force, and its trading part-
ners include New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, the United States, Chile, ASEAN, Japan, China,
South Korea, and Malaysia. Additional trade agreements concluded but not yet in force are with
Hong Kong, Indonesia, Peru, and the Pacific Island countries. Australia is also participating in
negotiations for several multilateral trade agreements, including the following: the RCEP; the
GCC, the Pacific Alliance Free Trade Agreement, and the EU- Australia Trade Agreement. 92
Additionally, the South Pacific Regional Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement
(SPARTECA), an agreement created by Australia and New Zealand, provides developing-
country members of the Pacific Islands Forum duty-free access to their markets. Member coun-
tries include the Cook Islands, Fiji, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Kiribati, and Niue. 93

CRITICAL ANALYSIS: Business Law
Bicycle Manufacturer Interested in Switching Gears with CETA

A Canadian manufacturer of high-end bicycles, BikesRUs, has a product. The CEO of BikesRUs has approached you to provide
long-standing relationship with retail purchasers in the US but advice regarding the possible benefits and drawbacks of the
wants to expand its sales globally. The company is consider- CETA agreement on his business. Advise the CEO by answering
ing venturing into the European Union, specifically Croatia and the following questions.
Italy. Additionally, while it has seen an increase in sales in the
US in 2018 and 2019, BikesRUs has noticed a decrease in sales Critical Analysis Questions
of its bicycles in the same years domestically. This is a concern 1. Explain one reason, related to CETA, that BikesRUs has
for BikesRUs, as it had strong revenues in Canada in 2016 and seen a decrease in domestic sales of its product.
20 17 and has had a loyal customer base. Furthermore, Bikes- 2. How can CETA benefit BikesRUs?
RUs noted a greater presence of French-made bicycles in the 3. If BikesRUs decides to export its products, what should it
same retai l stores as it sells its products. The prices these bi- know about the safety standards in the European
cycles are being sold at are just as competitive as BikesRUs's Union?

CHAPTER SUMMARY
In this chapter, we discussed: establishes an investor-state dispute-settlement sys-

tem, and regulates government procurement among
The historical development of the European Union.
other issues.
• The EU started as a project to establish long-lasting
Certain European Union laws relevant to Canad ian
peace following WWII.
businesses.
The EU developed over time through the signing of mul-
tiple treaties among member states, progressively in- • The EU has adopted common technical standards for all
creasing economic and political integration. member states; once a product has been accepted into
The Treaty of Rome established the common market of one EU country it can circulate freely within all EU
the European Economic Community (EEC). countries.
The MaastrichtTreaty (or the Treaty on European Union) • The EU also has sanitary and phytosanita ry require-
renamed the EEC to the EU. ments for food and feed safety and animal, plant, and
• The EU is an economic and monetary union. public health.
• The most important standards are those relating to
Governance of the European Union.
product safety, product liability, technical standardiza-
The key bodies of the EU are the European Council, the tion, packaging, and labelling.
Council ofthe European Union, the European Parlia-
The impact of Brexit on the EU and Canada.
ment, the European Commission, and the European
Court of Justice. • By leaving the European Union, the UK would lose its
CETA benefits, and another separate agreement would
Law-making in the European Union.
have to be negotiated between Canada and the UK.
The treaties are the basis or ground rules for all EU • Trade with the UK will be subject to WTO rules, which
action. are less favourable for Canadian companies doing busi-
• Regulations, directives, and decisions are derived from ness in the UK.
the principles and objectives set out in the treaties.
Other regional trade arrangements.
The EU's and Canada's economic and trade relationship
• Canada has 15 free trade agreements in force.
underCETA.
• The world is divided into numerous free trade areas and
• CETA creates a free trade area between the EU and customs unions, creating a complicated web of
Canada. regulations.
CETA regulates trade in goods and services, adjusts in-
tellectual property rights for pha rmaceutical drugs,
REVIEW QUESTIONS
Note that most of the answ ers for these questions will be 4. What is the connection between the Charter and the
found in the text. Some questions, however, address the status of a constitution for the EU? What is the
current status of issues, and students should ensure that present status of a constitution for the EU?
their information is up to date by searching current media
5. Are all countries in the EU members of the Eu ropean
sources.
Monetary Union (that is, have they all adopted the
common currency)?
1. Name the present members of the EU as of July 2019.
What countries are at the applicant stage? 6. Name the major institutions of the EU and briefly
describe their composition and f unction.
2. Briefly describe th e milestones in the development of
the EU from the Treaty of Rome to the present. 7. Why is CETA significant for Canadian businesses?
3. Describe the three pillars of the EU.

8. What are the rules of origin that goods must meet to these found? What types of activities are prohibited
benefit from tariff reductions under CETA? by this area of EU law?
9. What technical barriers to trade should Canadian 12. Describe the case in which the findings of the
businesses consider when they are exporting to the European Commission affected mergers that had
European Union? been agreed to by firms located outside of Europe.
10. How does the European Union protect intellectual 13. Describe the Google Shopping case.
property rights?
14. What is the difference between an individual
11. What are the three main prohibitions provided by EU exemption and a block exemption under Article 101?
competition law and where is the law relating to
15. Explain the major concern with the proliferation of
free trade agreements worldwide.
NOTES
1. European Commission, "Countries and Regions" (last 11. (18 December 2000), online (pdf): Official Journal of
modified 01August2019), online: Europa <http:// the European Communities <https://www.europarl
ec.europa.eu/trade/ policy/countries-and-regions/ .europa.eu/charter/ pdf/ text_en.pdf>.
countries/canada/>.
12. European Central Bank (ECB) (last modified 13
2. Signed 30 October 2016, on line: Government of February 2019), online: EUR-Lex <https://europa.eu/
Canada <https://www.international.gc.ca/trade- european-union/ about-eu/ institutions-bodies/
commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/ european-central-bank_en>.
agr-acc/ ceta-aecg/ index.aspx?lang=eng >.
13. European Council, "The Role of the European Council
3. Ibid. in Nominations and Appointments" (last modified 29
May 2019), online: Europa <https://www.consilium.
4. 11957E/ AFl/CNF (last visited 4 October 2019), on line:
europa.eu/ en/european-council/ role-nominations-
EUR-Lex <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/TX
appointment/>; see also art 13 of the Treaty on
T/?qid= l 570236643821&uri=CELEX:l1957E/AFl/ CNF>.
European Union.
5. OJ L 169, 29.6.1987 at 1-28 (last visited 4 October
14. European Union, "EU Institutions and Bodies in Brief"
2019), online: EUR-Lex <http://data.europa.eu/ eli/
(last modified 22 May 2018), online: Europa <https://
treaty/sea/ sign>.
europa.eu/ european-union/ about-eu/
6. OJ C 340, 10.11 .1997 at 115 (last visited 9 October institutions-bodies_en>.
15. Supra note 9.
treaty/ams/ fna_1/ sign>.
16. European Parliament (last visited 20 May 2019),
7. OJ C 326, 26.10.2012 at 13- 390 (last visited 4 October
online: Europa <https://europa.eu/ european-union/
about-eu/ institutions-bodies/
treaty/teu_2012/ oj >.
european-parliament_en >.
8. OJ C 80, 10.3.2001 at 1- 87 (last visited 4 October
17. European Commission, "What Is the Euro Area ?" (last
visited 2 July 2019), online: Europa <https://
treaty/ nice/ sign>.
ec.europa.eu/ info/ business-economy-euro/ euro-
9. OJ C 306, 17.12.2007 at 1- 271 (last accessed 4 area/ what-euro-area_en >.
October 2019), online: EUR-Lex < http://data.eu ropa.
18. "2019 Enlargement Package: 'North Macedonia and
eu/eli/ treaty/ lis/ sign >.
Albania Have Delivered on Reforms; Says Mogherini"
10. OJ C 326, 26.10.2012 at 47-390 (last visited 4 October (29 May 2019), online: European Union External Action
2019), online: EUR-Lex <http://data.europa.eu/ eli/ < https://eeas.eu ropa.eu/ head qua rters/ h eadq ua rters-
treaty/tfeu_2012/oj >. homepage_en/6340S/ 2019%20En la rgement%20

Package:%20%22North%20Macedonia%20and%20 ceta-aecg/chapter_summary-resume_chapitre.
Albania%20have%20delivered%20on%20 aspx?la ng=eng#a9>.
reforms%22,%20says%20Mogherini>.
29. Investment (last modified 14 July 2017). on line:
19. The European Council (last modified 30 June 2019). Government of Canada < https://www.i nternational.
on line: European Council <https://www.consi lium. gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-
europa.eu/en/european-council/>. com mercia ux/ag r-acc/ ceta-aecg/ cha pter_summary-
res u me_ cha pitre.aspx? Iang=eng#a8>.
20. Supra note 14.
30. Government Procurement (last modified 14 July
21. OJ C 326, 26.10.2012 at 13-390 (last visited 4 October
201 7). on line: Government of Canada <https://www.
2019), online: EUR-Lex <http://data .europa.eu/eli/
international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/ trade-
treaty/teu_2012/oj>.
agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ ceta-
22. Flaminio Costa v ENEL (1964) Case 6/64 <http://curia. aecg/chapter_summary-resume_chapitre.
europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&docid=87399&pa aspx?lang=eng#a 19>.
gelndex=O&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&
31. Text of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade
part=l &cid=2346058>; lnternationale
Agreement-Annex 19 (last modified 3 October
Handelsgessellschaft (1970), CJEU 1970 01125.
2017), on line: Government of Canada <https://www.
23. Microsoft v Commission (12 July 2006), COMP/C-3/37.792; international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-
Microsoft v Commission (27 June 2012), T-167/08. agreements-accords-commerciaux/ agr-acc/ ceta-
aecg/text-texte/19-A.aspx?lang=eng#b 1>.
24. European Commission, "One Year on EU-Canada
Trade Agreement Delivers Positive Results" (20 32. European Commission, "CETA Explained" (last
September 2018), online: Europa <http://trade. modified 21 September 2017), online: Europa <http://
ec.eu ropa.eu/doclib/ press/ index.cfm ?id= 1907>. ec.europa.eu/trade/ policy/ in-focus/ ceta/ ceta-
explained/ index_en.htm >.
25. Protocol I: Rules of Origin and Origin Procedures (last
modified 14 July 2017), on line: Government of Canada 33. Chuck Chiang, "Court Smooths Way for Canadian
<https:// www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/ Exports to Europe;' Business in Vancouver (6 June
trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ 2019), online: <https://biv.com/ article/ 2019/ 06/
ceta-aecg/chapter_summary-resume_chapitre. court-smooths-way-canadian-exports-europe>.
aspx?lang=eng#a2_ 1>.
34. European Commission, "General Product Safety
26. Customs and Trade Facilitation (last modified 14 July Directive" (last visited 2 October 2019), online: Europa
2017). on line: Government of Canada <https://www. < https://eu r-lex.eu ropa.eu/ lega 1-content/ EN/TXT/? u ri
international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/ trade- =CELEX:02001L0095-20100101 >.
agreements-accords-commerciaux/ agr-acc/ceta-
35. General Product Safety Directive 2001 / 95/ EC, art 3.
aecg/chapter_summary-resume_chapitre.
aspx?lang=eng#a6>. 36. Ibid, art 2.
27. Annex 5-A: Origin Quotas and Alternatives to the 37. Ibid.
Product-Specific Rules of Origin in Annex 5 (last
38. European Commission, "EU Bans Sale of Non-Child
modified 3 October 2017), on line: Government of
Resistant and Novelty Cigarette Lighters" (11 March
Canada <https://www.international.gc.ca/ trade-
2008), online: Europa <https://europa.eu/ rapid/
commerce/trade-agreements-accords-com merciaux/
press-release_IP-08-425_en.htm>.
ag r-acc/ceta-aecg/text-texte/
Pl .aspx?lang=eng#5_ 1>. 39. Ibid.
28. Cross-Border Trade in Services (last modified 14 July 40. Ibid.

2017), online: Government of Canada <https://www.
41. European Commission, "Liability of Defective
international.gc.ca/ trade-commerce/ trade-
Products" (last visited 12 October 2019), on line:
agreements-accords-commerciaux/ agr-acc/
Europa <https://ec.europa.eu/ growth/ single-market/
© (2020] Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

goods/ free-movement-sectors/ 53. Coordination of Certain Rules Concerning Copyright

liability-defective-products_en >. and Rights Related to Copyright Applicable to
Satellite Broadcasting and Cable Retransmission,
42. Directive 2006/42/ EC of the European Parliament and
online: EUR-Lex <http://data.europa.eu/ eli/
of the Council of 17 May 2006 on Machinery, and
dir/ 1993/ 83/ 2019-06-06>.
Amending Directive 95/ 16/ EC (last visited 4 October
2019), online: EUR-Lex <http:// data.europa.eu/ eli/ 54. Unitary Patent (last modified 9 June 2017), online:
dir/2006/42/2019-07-26>. European Patent Office <https://www.epo.org/ law-
practice/ unitary/ unitary-patent.html>.
43. European Commission, "Mutual Recognition
Agreements" (last visited 4 October 2019), online: 55. When Will the Unitary Patent System Start? (last
Europa <https://ec.europa.eu/growth/ single-market/ modified 2 September 2019), online: European Patent
goods/ international-aspects/ mutual-recognition- Office <https://www.epo.org/ law-practice/ unitary/
agreements_en>. unita ry-patent/ start.htm I>.
44. European Parliament and Council Directive 94/ 62/ EC 56. Directive (EU) 2015/ 2436 of the European Parliament
of December 20, 1994, Annex II. and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to
Approximate the Laws of the Member States Relating
45. Regulation (EC) No 1935/ 2004 of the European
to Trade Marks, OJ L 336, 23.12.2015 at 1-26, on line:
Parliament and of the Council of October 27, 2004,
EUR-Lex <http://data.europa.eu/ eli/ dir/ 2015/ 2436/
on Materials and Articles Intended to Come into
oj>; Regulation (Eu) 2017/ 1001 of the European
Contact with Food.
Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the
46. European Commission, "Labelling and Packaging" European Union Trade Mark, on line: Official Journal of
(last modified 2 August 2019), online: Europa the European Union <https:// eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-
< https://trade.ec.eu ropa.eu/ tradehel p/ content/ EN/TXT/ PDF/?u ri=CELEX:32017R 1001 >.
labelling-and-packaging>.
57. European Commission, Report on the EU Customs
47. Regulation (EC) No 178/ 2002 of the European Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (201 7),
Parliament and of the Council of January 28, 2002. on line (pdf): Europa <https://ec.europa.eu/ taxation_
customs/ sites/ taxation/ files/ report_on_eu_customs
48. Ibid, art 18.
_enforcement_of_ipr_2017_en.pdf>.
49. European Commission, Trade Helpdesk, "Sanitary
58. European Commission, "Intellectual Property
and Phytosanitary Requirements" (last modified
Rights- Facts and Figures" (2018), online: Europa
2 August 2019), online: Europa <https:/ /trade.
< https:// ec.eu ropa .eu/taxatio n_customs/ business/
ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/ sanitary-and-phytosanitary-
customs-controls/ counterfeit-piracy-other-ipr-
requirements>.
violations/ ipr-infringements-facts-figures_en>.
50. Council Directive 2000/ 29/ EC of May 8, 2000, "On
59. Ibid.
Protective Measures Against the Introduction into
the Community of Organisms Harmful to Plants or 60. Ibid.
Plant Products and AgainstTheir Spread Within the
61. Joined cases C 446/ 09 and C 495/09, online: lnfoCuria,
Community;' on line: EUR-Lex <http://data.europa.eu/
Case-Law of the Court of Justice <http://curia.europa.
eli/ dir/ 2000/ 29/ 2018-04-01 >.
eu/juris/ document/ document.jsf?docid= l 15783
51. Ibid. &doclang=en>.
52. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 62. European Commission, "Competition, Antitrust
Property Rights (15 April 1994), Marrakesh Agreement Overview" (last modified 21 November 2014), online:
Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, Europa <http:// ec.europa.eu/competition/ antitrust/
1869 UNTS 299, 33 ILM 1197 (1994), online: World overview_en.html>.
Trade Organization <https://www.wto.org/engl ish/
63. Ibid.
docs_e/ legal_e/ 31 bis_trips_Ol _e.htm>.
64. Ibid.

65. Art 101-1, TFEU, on line: EUR-Lex <https://eur-lex.europa. 78. EU Exit: Long-Term Economic Analysis (Novem ber
eu/ legal-content/en/ ALU?uri=CELEX:12008E101 >. 2018), online (pdf): HM Government <https://assets.
publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/
66. C-56/ 64, on line: lnfoCuria, Case-Law of the Court of
system/ uploads/ attachment_data/file/ 760484/ 28_
Justice <http://curia.europa.eu/juris/ liste.
November_EU_Exit_-_Long-term_economic_
jsf?num=C-56/ 64&1anguage=en>.
analysis_1_.pdf>.
67. C-8/ 08, on line: lnfoCuria, Case-Law of the Court of
79. Lisa O'Carroll, "Brexit: Netherlands Talking to 250 Firms
Justice < http://curia.europa.eu/juris/ 1iste.
About Leaving UK" (9 February 2019), online: <https://
jsf?language=en&num=c-8/ 08>.
www.theguardian.com/ politics/ 2019/feb/ 09/
68. AT.39740 (27 June 2017), online: Europa <http:// brexit-uk-companies-discuss-moving-to-netherlands>.
ec.europa.eu/ competition/ antitrust/ cases/ dec_
80. Trade and Investment Agreements (last modified 30
docs/ 39740/ 39740_14996_3.pdf>.
September 2019), on line: Government of Canada
69. European Commission, "Antitrust: Commission Fines < https://www.internationaI.gc.ca/trade-com merce/
Google €2.42 Billion for Abusing Dominance as trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/
Search Engine by Giving Illegal Advantage to Own i ndex.aspx ?lang=eng>.
Comparison Shopping Service" (27 June 2017),
81. Overview and Benefits of the CPTPP (last modified 11
online: Europa <http://europa.eu/ rapid/
February 2019), online: Government of Canada
press-release_IP-17-1784_en.htm>.
< https://www.i nternati on al .g c.ca/trade-com merce/
70. Supra note 68. trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/ag r-acc/
cptpp-ptpgp/ overview-apercu.aspx?lang=eng>.
71. Ibid.
82. Canada and the Pacific Alliance (last modified 8
72. Ibid.
August 2019), online: Government of Canada <https://
73. Peter Georg Picht & Gaspare Loderer, "Framing www.international.gc.ca/ world-monde/
Algorithms- Competition Law and (Other) international_relations-relations_internationales/
Regulatory Tools" (30 October 2018), Max Planck pacific_alliance-alliance_pacifique/ index.
Institute for Innovation & Competition Research aspx?lang=eng>.
Paper Series No 18-24, on line: SSRN <https://ssrn.
83. Frances Jenner, "Chile Leaves UNASUR as Alternat ive
com/ abstract=3275198>.
PROSUR Gains Traction" (25 Apri l 2019), online: Latin
74. European Commission, "Competition: Overview" (21 America Reports <https://latinamericareports.com/
November 2014), online: Europa <http://ec.europa. chile-leaves-unasur-creates-prosur/ 1817/>.
eu/ compet ition/ antitrust/overview_en.html>.
84. European Commission, "Negotiations and Agreements"
75. The Merger Regulation- Council Regulation (EC) No (last modified 25 July 2019), online: Europa <http://
139/ 2004 of 20 January 2004 on the Control of ec.europa.eu/trade/ policy/countries-and-regions/
Concentrations Between Undertakings, online: EUR- negotiations-and-agreements/>.
Lex <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/en/
85. Ibid.
ALU?uri=CELEX%3A32004R01 39>.
86. Central European Free Trade Ag reement Secret ariat
76. European Commission, " Representation in Ireland:
(last visited 7 October 2019), online: <http:// cefta.i nt/
Brexit and Ireland" (last modified 11 October 2019),
legal-documents/ >.
online: Europa <https://ec.europa.eu/ ireland/ news/
key-eu-policy-areas/brexit_en>. 87. The Asean Declaration (Bangkok Declaration)
Bangkok (8 August 1967), online: ASEAN <https://
77. Nicholas Bloom et al, "Brexit Is Already Affecting UK
asean.org/the-asean-declaration-bangkok
Bu sinesses- Here's How" (13 March 201 9), on line:
-declarat ion-bangkok-8-august-1967/>.
Harvard Business Review <https:/ / hbr.org/201 9/03/
brexit-is-already-affecting-uk-busi nesses-heres 88. Eryk Bagshaw, "Australia Leads SecretTrade
-how>. Negotiatio ns That Will Sideline US;' Sydney Morning

Herald (26 June 2019), on line: <https:// www.smh. 91. Encyclopaedia Britannica Editors, "Gulf Cooperation
com.au/politics/federal/ australia-leads-secret-trade- Council" (last modified 15 June 2019), online:
negotiations-that-will-sideline-us-20190626-p521 hf. <https://www.britannica .com/topic/
html>. Gulf-Cooperation-Council>.
89. Status of AfCFTA Ratification (7 July 2019), online: 92. Australia's Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) (last visited 1
Tralac (Trade Law Centre) <https://www.tralac.org/ July 2019), online: Australian Government <https://
resou rces/ infog ra ph ics/ 13 795-status-of-afcfta- dfat.gov.au/ trade/ agreements/ Pages/ trade-
ratification.htm I>. ag reements.aspx>.
90. Loes Witschge, "African Continental Free Trade Area: 93. South Pacific Regional Trade and Economic
What You Need to Know;' Al Jazeera 20 March 2018), Cooperation Agreement, on line: UNCTAD Investment
online: <https://www.aljazeera.com/ news/2018/03/ Policy Hub <https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/
african-continental-free-trade-area-afcfta- internationa 1-i nvestm ent-ag reements/ g rou pi ngs/ 1I
180317191954318.html>. sparteca-south-pacific-regional-trade-and-economic-
cooperation-agreement->.
FURTHER READING
Catherine Bernard & Steve Peers, eds, European Union Law TC Hartley, The Foundations of European Community Law,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017). 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).
WEBSITES
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN and protection agreements, World Trade Organization, and
ASEAN Free Trade Area) : <https://asean.org/> other trade-related topics): <http://www.international.
Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade: gc.ca/ trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/ index.
<http://www.dfat.gov.au > aspx>
East African Community: <http://www.eac.int> Organization of the American States (source for all t rade
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS): agreements in the region): <http://www.sice.oas.org>
<http:// www.ecowas.int> South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation/ South
Europa (European Commission): <https://ec.europa.eu/ Asian Free Trade Area (SAARC/SAFTA): <http://saarc-
info/ index_en> sec.org >
Global Affairs Canada (agreements by country, A-Z; free
trade agreements, foreign investment promotion and
LIST OF CASES
Google Search (Shopping), European Commission, AT.39740 lnfoCuria, Case-Law of the Court ofJustice <http://curia.
(27 June 2017), online: Europa <http://ec.europa.eu/ europa.eu/juris/ document/ document.jsf?docid=
competition/ antitrust/cases/ dec_docs/ 39740/ 39740_ 115783&doclang=en>.
14996_3.pdf>. T-Mobile Netherlands BV and Others (European Court of
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Justice, 2009) C-8/ 08, online: lnfoCuria, Case-Law of the
Industrial Company and Others (European Court of Court ofJustice <http://curia.europa.eu/juris/ liste.
Justice, 2011) and Nokia Corporation v Her Majesty 's jsf?language=en&num=c-8/ 08>.
Commissioners of Revenue (European Court of Justice,
2011 ), joined cases C 446/ 09 and C 495/ 09, on line:

Cha. 4 - Legal Aspects of International Business - A Canadian Perspective, 4-115-151

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Cha. 4 - Legal Aspects of International Business - A Canadian Perspective, 4-115-151

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cha. 4 - Legal Aspects of International Business - A Canadian Perspective, 4-115-151

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 4

The European Union and Other

The Historical Development of the European Union

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

Important Treaties in the EU's Development

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

The Maastricht Treaty

The Treaty of Amsterdam

Agricultural policy Racism

Environmental policy Crime

Competition and trade policy Terrorism

Fiscal and monetary issues (common

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

The Treaty of Nice

The Treaty of Lisbon

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

The Common Currency

Governance of the European Union

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

FIGURE 4.1 Institutions of the EU

Court of Justice of the

Law-Making in the European Union: The Council of the European Union,

The European Parliament

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

The European Commission

EU Law and Member State Law

(a) the customs union;

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

(a) its internal market;

(a) the protection and improvement of human health;

Harmonization of Law in the EU

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

Law Enforcement in the European Union

The European Court ofJustice

The Court ofAuditors

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

CETA and Canadian Business

What CETA Covers

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

CETA Chapter 2: Trade in Goods

BOX 4.3 Examples of Canadian Sectors Benefitting from CETA

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

Rules of Origin under CETA

CETA Chapter 6: Customs and Trade Facilitation

BOX 4.4 CETA Rules of Origin

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

CETA Chapter 9: Trade in Services

CETA Chapter 8: Investment Protection

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

CETA Chapter 19: Government Procurement

CETA Provisionally in Force

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.

European Union Legal Provisions Relevant to Canadian Business

Product Safety in the EU

BOX 4.5 Safe Product Definition

© [2020) Emond Montgomery Publications. All Rights Reserved.