No description available.

Because of the Agreement on Agriculture’s (AoA) Article 13, dubbed the “Peace Clause,” the challengeability of agricultural subsidies has been limited; Article 13 had the power to prevent several types of legal challenges. The Peace Clause has expired, and now many agricultural subsidies can be challenged under substantive provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). However, there has been some uncertainty, because the new arrangement of agricultural subsidies’ challengeability is being defined by the interpretation and correlation of three different WTO agreements. This study verified, using a two-pronged method, that there is no conflict among the GATT 1994, the SCM Agreement and the AoA, and for this reason, they have to be applied together to regulate agricultural subsidies. This does not mean that all SCM Agreement provisions are automatically applied to agricultural subsidies, with a consequent free ride for challenges to agricultural subsidies. A successful challenge still has to overcome the SCM Agreement’s higher thresholds for challengeability compared with those of the GATT 1994 period. This condemnation became more difficult after the implementation of the WTO. Consequently, the goals established in the AoA of substantial and progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection still have to be accomplished.

Because of the Agreement on Agriculture’s (AoA) Article 13, dubbed the “Peace Clause,” the challengeability of agricultural subsidies has been limited; Article 13 had the power to prevent several types of legal challenges. The Peace Clause has expired, and now many agricultural subsidies can be challenged under substantive provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). However, there has been some uncertainty, because the new arrangement of agricultural subsidies’ challengeability is being defined by the interpretation and correlation of three different WTO agreements. This study verified, using a two-pronged method, that there is no conflict among the GATT 1994, the SCM Agreement and the AoA, and for this reason, they have to be applied together to regulate agricultural subsidies. This does not mean that all SCM Agreement provisions are automatically applied to agricultural subsidies, with a consequent free ride for challenges to agricultural subsidies. A successful challenge still has to overcome the SCM Agreement’s higher thresholds for challengeability compared with those of the GATT 1994 period. This condemnation became more difficult after the implementation of the WTO. Consequently, the goals established in the AoA of substantial and progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection still have to be accomplished.

Because of the Agreement on Agriculture’s (AoA) Article 13, dubbed the “Peace Clause,” the challengeability of agricultural subsidies has been limited; Article 13 had the power to prevent several types of legal challenges. The Peace Clause has expired, and now many agricultural subsidies can be challenged under substantive provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). However, there has been some uncertainty, because the new arrangement of agricultural subsidies’ challengeability is being defined by the interpretation and correlation of three different WTO agreements. This study verified, using a two-pronged method, that there is no conflict among the GATT 1994, the SCM Agreement and the AoA, and for this reason, they have to be applied together to regulate agricultural subsidies. This does not mean that all SCM Agreement provisions are automatically applied to agricultural subsidies, with a consequent free ride for challenges to agricultural subsidies. A successful challenge still has to overcome the SCM Agreement’s higher thresholds for challengeability compared with those of the GATT 1994 period. This condemnation became more difficult after the implementation of the WTO. Consequently, the goals established in the AoA of substantial and progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection still have to be accomplished.

Because of the Agreement on Agriculture’s (AoA) Article 13, dubbed the “Peace Clause,” the challengeability of agricultural subsidies has been limited; Article 13 had the power to prevent several types of legal challenges. The Peace Clause has expired, and now many agricultural subsidies can be challenged under substantive provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). However, there has been some uncertainty, because the new arrangement of agricultural subsidies’ challengeability is being defined by the interpretation and correlation of three different WTO agreements. This study verified, using a two-pronged method, that there is no conflict among the GATT 1994, the SCM Agreement and the AoA, and for this reason, they have to be applied together to regulate agricultural subsidies. This does not mean that all SCM Agreement provisions are automatically applied to agricultural subsidies, with a consequent free ride for challenges to agricultural subsidies. A successful challenge still has to overcome the SCM Agreement’s higher thresholds for challengeability compared with those of the GATT 1994 period. This condemnation became more difficult after the implementation of the WTO. Consequently, the goals established in the AoA of substantial and progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection still have to be accomplished.

This study focuses on the discretionary inter vivos trust. It specifically investigates what the discretion of a trustee comprises and in which circumstances (if any) the court may amend the trustee‟s discretion as stipulated in the deed of trust. In order to make any meaningful conclusions, the different types of trusts, and more specific the way in which trusts are classified, needs to be researched. An inter vivos trust is classified as a contract for the sake of a third. Consequently contract law rules are applied in the interpretation and amendment of an inter vivos trust. The source, goal and tenor of a trustee‟s discretion, as well as the circumstances wherein this discretion may be amended, are investigated. The general rule is that courts have no discretion to amend a trust, but there is an exception to the rule. In accordance with article 13 of the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988 courts do have the power to amend or cancel the deed of trust in certain circumstances. In Potgieter and Another v Potgieter NO and Others 2012 (1) SA 637 (HHA) the court ruled that the power granted by article 13 does not enable judges to create law by amendment of the deed of trust according to their subjective interpretation of what is fair and just. The facts of the Potgieter case serve as problem statement for this study by focusing on the problems and unjust consequences of the strict application of contract law rules on a trust when the court does not take the changing circumstances of the trust founder into account. / LLM (Estate Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

This study focuses on the discretionary inter vivos trust. It specifically investigates what the discretion of a trustee comprises and in which circumstances (if any) the court may amend the trustee‟s discretion as stipulated in the deed of trust. In order to make any meaningful conclusions, the different types of trusts, and more specific the way in which trusts are classified, needs to be researched. An inter vivos trust is classified as a contract for the sake of a third. Consequently contract law rules are applied in the interpretation and amendment of an inter vivos trust. The source, goal and tenor of a trustee‟s discretion, as well as the circumstances wherein this discretion may be amended, are investigated. The general rule is that courts have no discretion to amend a trust, but there is an exception to the rule. In accordance with article 13 of the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988 courts do have the power to amend or cancel the deed of trust in certain circumstances. In Potgieter and Another v Potgieter NO and Others 2012 (1) SA 637 (HHA) the court ruled that the power granted by article 13 does not enable judges to create law by amendment of the deed of trust according to their subjective interpretation of what is fair and just. The facts of the Potgieter case serve as problem statement for this study by focusing on the problems and unjust consequences of the strict application of contract law rules on a trust when the court does not take the changing circumstances of the trust founder into account. / LLM (Estate Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

[pt] Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar a relevância de tratados internacionais e como eles afetam políticas domésticas, bem como são afetados pelos Estados que participam dele. Para isso, será analisada a Convenção-Quadro para Controle do Tabaco da Organização Mundial da Saúde. Este tratado, de 2003 e ratificado pelo Brasil em 2005, é um bom exemplo, como será defendido neste artigo, de como o doméstico e internacional se afetam e, deste contato, são formuladas as políticas nacionais e internacionais. Esta pesquisa irá realizar um estudo de caso para analisar as disputas que ocorrem em âmbito doméstico e são externalizadas para o internacional, em particular na temática do tabagismo. Para tal, a indústria de tabaco Souza Cruz, maior do território brasileiro, será analisada sob a ótica de suas estratégias de publicidade, propaganda e patrocínio de produtos de tabaco, enquanto as Conferências das Partes, que ocorrem a cada dois anos entre os Estados- Membros da Convenção-Quadro, buscam eficiência na implementação das diretrizes do Artigo 13 da Convenção, que lida com esse tema. O estudo de caso tem como objetivo mapear a relação entre as estratégias da indústria e ação reativa das Conferências das Partes, de modo a entender como os Estados-Membros poderiam alcançar o controle do tabaco de forma mais rápida e eficiente, sem que as empresas encontrem brechas nas legislações nacionais ou na dificuldade de fiscalização das normas já implementadas no país. / [en] This article aims to analyze the relevance of international treaties and how they affect domestic policies as well as are affected by the states that participate in it. To this end, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control of the World Health Organization will be analyzed. This treaty, from 2003 and ratified by Brazil in 2005, is a good example, as will be defended in this article, of how the domestic and the international affect eachother and from this contact, national and international policies are formulated. This research will carry out a case study to analyze the disputes that occur in the domestic sphere and are outsourced to the international, in particular in the theme of smoking and tobacco. To this end, the Souza Cruz tobacco industry, the largest in Brazil, will be analyzed from the point of view of its strategies for advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products, while the Conferences of the Parties, which take place every two years between the Member States, seek efficiency in the implementation of the Article 13 guidelines of the Convention, which deals with this theme. The case study aims to map the relationship between industry strategies and reactive actions of the Conferences of the Parties, in order to understand how Member States could achieve tobacco control more quickly and efficiently, without companies finding gaps in national legislations or in the difficulty of monitoring the norms already implemented in the country.