Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Role of Risk Assessment in Precautionary Intervention: A Comparison of Judicial Trends in the EC and WTO

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law

This paper focuses on the meanings attached to the "precautionary principle" in judgments passed down by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the European Community (EC) courts. It speaks to claims that, in response to WTO litigation, the EC courts are beginning to construe the precautionary principle in a manner that more closely resembles obligations arising from the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS Agreement). It illustrates that although disparities between interpretations in EC and WTO case law of legitimate precautionary intervention are growing to be less obvious, inconsistencies continue to exist.

Affiliations: 1: Manchester University Law School


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation