We use cookies on this site to provide you with an informative and engaging experience and also to help us to continually improve our site for you. Without allowing cookies certain features of the site will not be available. To learn more about how we use cookies, please view our cookie policy. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, you consent to our use of cookies on this device in accordance with our policy.

Logo of Wolters Kluwer, Kluwer Law Online

Home > All journals > Global Trade and Customs Journal > 10(11) >

Causation in Trade Remedy Actions: Problems with the ‘But for’ Test

Cover image ofGlobal Trade and Customs Journal

$25.00 - Rental (PDF) *

$49.00 - Article (PDF) *

*service fee may apply
Causation in Trade Remedy Actions: Problems with the ‘But for’ Test


Global Trade and Customs Journal
Volume 10, Issue 11/12 (2015) pp. 402 – 406

https://doi.org/10.54648/gtcj2015048



Abstract

Trade policy commentators have advocated the use of the ‘but for’ test in determining causation in trade remedy investigations. While a ‘but for’ or counterfactual analysis has been fairly common in tort and contract cases, it may not be appropriate in the settings of trade remedy actions. Trade remedy actions often include multiple causes and involve longer periods of investigation. Furthermore, the efficacy of ‘but for’ test in conducting nonattribution analysis is ambiguous. The article argues that a typical ‘but for’ analysis is not susceptible for empirical observation and may require complex economic or statistical analysis, which may not be in the interests of all WTO members.


Extract




Subscribe to this journal

Interested in a subscription? Contact our sales team

Browse by practice area
Share
Stay up to date


RSSETOC