Antonina Bakardjieva Engelbrekt

The WTO Dispute Settlement System and the Evolution of International IP Law: An Institutional Perspective

One of the major advancements in the legal regime of international trade with the transition from GATT to the WTO was the constitution of a more sophisticated and efficient dispute settlement system (DSS). The institutional design of dispute settlement was negotiated heavily during the Uruguay Round and is eventually set out in the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) forming part of the Agreement Establishing the WTO. By linking the international legal regime of intellectual property (IP) with that of international trade through the TRIPS Agreement, the DSU becomes applicable also to disputes based on alleged violations by Members of their obligations concerning IP rights as laid down in TRIPS.This paper provides in a first step a concise description of the evolution and main components of the WTO dispute settlement system. Taking a comparative institutional approach, it conceptualises the DSS as one among many interlocked arenas for decision-making on global IP policy issues. International adjudication thus presents an alternative to international and national political and administrative processes, but also to unfettered global markets for information goods. The paper looks closer into the institutional modalities that condition participation of interested actors (private entities and states) in dispute settlement proceedings and compares these with participation modalities of alternative decision-making processes. The paper concludes with some pragmatic proposals that link issues of governance with the evolution of IP law at the international level.In the paper the argument is made first, that implicit in every discussion on substantive IP law and policy is the question of choosing the appropriate level and institution for IP decision-making in a multi-level system of IP governance. Secondly, it is argued that substantively just and efficient outcomes are intrinsically linked to and dependent on the institutional design of law and policy making processes. Given the public good nature of information and knowledge, which are at the core of IP rights, the norms for attribution and enforcement of such rights are of relevance for broad interests of citizens, researchers, and users of information goods. Hence, the capacity of IP institutions to ensure adequate representation and participation of affected actors and interests is decisive for accommodating new interests as they emerge and for facilitating change and regime flexibility. Any future reform of TRIPS should therefore not only deal with substantive rules but should also consider the need for change in procedural and institutional modalities.

The EU’s Role in Fighting Global Imbalances

The EU’s Role in Fighting Global Imbalances looks at the role of the European Union in addressing some of the greatest challenges of our time: poverty, protectionism, climate change, and human traf ...

The Impact of EU Enlargement on Private Law Governance in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Consumer Protection

The impact of EU enlargement on private law governance in Central and Eastern Europe: the case of consumer protection

Trust in the European Union: What Is It and How Does It Matter?

Bakardijeva Engelbrekt, Bremberg, Michalski, and Oxelheim introduce the concept of trust in the European Union by pointing out its elusive character comprising both interpersonal relations and attitudes towards organizations and broad-based institutions in society. In the early days of integration, trust was primarily connected to the European security community. Then, trust was present mainly among political, economic, and bureaucratic elites while public confidence in European integration took a vaguer form. Today, trust in the EU is challenged by numerous developments, ranging from the deteriorating internal and external security situation and terrorism to rising populism and anti-establishment sentiments. Also, rapid change in the digitalization of society and changing conditions for socio-economic development play a decisive role in the evolution of trust in Europe.

Effectiveness and Enforcement of Consumer Law in Sweden

Sweden is widely regarded as a country with high profile in consumer protection policy and well functioning consumer law and institutions. The foundations of the legal and institutional framework of consumer policy were laid down already at the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s. This framework, with specialised consumer law statutes and prominent public institutions entrusted with the implementation and enforcement of consumer law and policy, has generally stood the test of time. Most of the original institutions, like the Swedish Consumer Agency (Konsumentverket, KOV) with the Consumer Ombudsman (Konsumentombudsmannen, KO) and the Public Board for Consumer Complaints (Allmanna reklamationsnamnden, ARN), are still in place. There is furthermore remarkable continuity in the overall structure and general principles of consumer legislation. Certainly, in the course of the almost six decades of active consumer policy, some important changes in the approach to enforcement and more generally, to the governance of consumer policy have taken place in response to various political and societal developments. A particularly significant factor for change has been Sweden’s accession to the European Union (EU) in 1995 and the ensuing process of Europeanisation.

The EU and the growing number of complex security threats

In recent years, a sense of danger has become more and more salient in Europe in a number of areas. Some of these perceptions are new and unexpected; others are well-known and have been long debated. They are often held to reflect fear and perceived vulnerability in open and complex societies, yet are also justified in a situation marked by uncertainty in several areas. Europe in the second half of the 2010s seems out of step with the trend prevailing in many other parts of the world, where the liberal order is not seen as the obvious way forward. The fact that a number of political regimes and organized groups around the world do not share liberal values and norms increases the feeling of vulnerability. The perceived or actual threats have furnished a fertile soil for illiberal forces in European countries, and the polarizing impact of such forces on the political climate complicates efforts by the public authorities to confront various perceptions and possibilities of danger. This set of problems has been well-captured by Anthony Giddens (1990) and Ulrich Beck (1992), who speak of the paradox of late modernity. Advanced and affluent societies attempt, by rational means, to manage the risks that arise from social and economic development, thereby engendering the belief that such risks can be parried and neutralized. But those in power often lack the capacity to counter threats of this kind, due to the latter’s complexity and/or scope. When this incapacity becomes evident, a deep crisis of confidence results – with unfortunate consequences for democracy. In the light of the above, the new and threatening situations that have arisen inside and outside the borders of the European Union (EU) are testing in full the ability of the Union to carry out joint crisis management. In Europe’s eastern reaches, Russia’s aggressive policy in Ukraine, its annexation of the Crimean peninsula and military support to the breakaway republics of Donbas and Luhansk have underlined once again

Effectiveness and Enforcement of Consumer Law in Bulgaria

Bulgaria belongs to a group of Central and East European (CEE) countries, which until only recently were commonly referred to as ‘transition economies’. As is well known, for several decades after the end of World War II, Bulgaria was part of the Soviet sphere of influence and was characterised by command economy and authoritarian rule. Following the demise of state socialism, the country embarked on a difficult path of reforms towards building democracy, rule of law and a social market economy. Importantly, already in the early 1990s the country made clear its aspirations to join the European institutions. Indeed, in 1992 Bulgaria was accepted as member to the Council of Europe and in 2007, after lengthy negotiations and years of monitoring, technical assistance and preparation, acceded the European Union (EU). These processes of transition and integration in the European institutions have been decisive for determining the direction of Bulgarian consumer law and policy, as well as for shaping the modalities of consumer law enforcement. As a result of sustained efforts, the country now has in place detailed consumer legislation, closely following EU consumer law instruments, and a full-fledged institutional framework of consumer law enforcement with a variety of public and private bodies and enforcement avenues. This development has certainly contributed to improving the position of Bulgarian consumers. Nevertheless, the system of enforcement still suffers of serious weaknesses, related foremost to limited resources and institutional capacity, and to imperfect implementation and application of consumer law.

The EU and global imbalances

The EU’s Role in Fighting Global Imbalances looks at the role of the European Union in addressing some of the greatest challenges of our time: poverty, protectionism, climate change, and human trafficking. Contributions from ten leading scholars in the fields of economics, law, and political science provide in-depth analyses of three key dimensions of EU foreign policy, namely: the internal challenges facing the EU, as its 28 member countries struggle to coordinate their actions; the external challenges facing the EU on the global arena, in areas where global imbalances are particularly pervasive, and where measures taken by the Union can have an important impact; and the EU´s performance on the global arena, in the eyes of other key actors. Based on a broad and interdisciplinary understanding of the concept of global imbalances, this book argues that these challenges follow from pervasive global imbalances, which at root are economic, political, and legal in character.

The Scandinavian Model of Unfair Competition Law

This contribution aims to give a brief introduction into the law against unfair competition of the Scandinavian countries, namely Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.1 Presenting the Scandinavian approach is highly relevant for a discussion on the future of unfair competition law in Europe for at least two reasons.