Trade law Part 42

The New UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity: A Counterbalance to the WTO?
Graber, C. B.
Journal of International Economic Law
Volume 9, Number 3, September 2006 p.553-574

On 20 October 2005, the 33rd UNESCO General Conference adopted by a majority of 148 votes to two the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (CCD). The major objectives of the CCD are the recognition of the dual nature of cultural expressions as objects of trade and artefacts of cultural value and the recognition of the sovereign right of governments to formulate and implement cultural policies and measures for the protection and promotion of cultural diversity. The ambitious role assigned to the CCD by its proponents is to fill an existing lacuna for cultural objectives in public international law and to serve as a cultural counterbalance to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in future conflicts between trade and culture. Opponents, however, have criticized the CCD as an instrument of disguised protectionism and claimed that it violates freedom of expression and information. This article endeavours to explain how cultural diversity has become an issue of international law and provides a critical assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the CCD. It explores in particular the possible linkages between the CCD and the WTO.

The World Trade law of Censorship and Internet Filtering
Tim Wu
Chicago Journal of International Law
Volume 7, Number 1, Summer 2006 p.263

Labour law and trade
Naomi Cervin
New Zealand Law Journal
June 2006 p.162

Reviews Prof Hepple’s book

Bubbles! The indispensability of the Comparative Advertising Directive to trade mark law
Timothy Pinto
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Volume 1, Number 9, August 2006 p.574-577

The irresistible force of freedom of speech meets the immovable object: trade mark law in South Africa
Owen H. Dean
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Volume 1, Number 9, August 2006 p.614-620

Trade Mark Law
International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law
Volume 37, Number 4, 2006

From the picket line to the board room: Union shareholder activism in Australia
Kirsten Anderson and Ian Ramsay
Company and Securities Law Journal
Volume 24, Number 5, August 2006 p.279

Trade unions in Australia have recently begun to use provisions in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to pursue employee interests. They are putting forward resolutions to be voted on at company AGMs; lobbying for proxy votes through the distribution of statements in support of union sponsored AGM resolutions; posing questions to the board of directors at shareholder meetings in order to highlight employee interests; and, less commonly, requisitioning EGMs. Unions appear to be utilising corporate law in order to forge a role in influencing company workplace practices, where this role has been greatly diminished because of changes to labour law. This article examines the recent practice of union shareholder activism in Australia through eight case studies in which unions have used corporate law to advance employee interests. The rationale, methods, effectiveness and perceived legitimacy of unions engaging in shareholder activism are evaluated.

Can s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) be invoked against misleading statements by a proponent of a project in an environmental impact statement under Pts IV or V of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)?
Anna Christie
Environmental and Planning Law Journal
Volume 23, Number 4, August 2006 p.288

Environmental impact statements perform multiple roles. They inform decision-makers who decide whether to allow or prohibit a development (or “activity”). The role of EISs also extends further than the procedural requirements of impact assessment law. They are quasi-marketing documents which can be partisan towards the interests of the development proceeding. As such they have the potential to mislead their audiences about the extent and severity of impacts. A key feature of EISs is that they tend to contain highly technical and scientific information, which may be presented in such as way as to be misleading. The prohibition of “misleading or deceptive”conduct pursuant to s 52 of the Trade Practices Act is the subject of this analysis, in particular the test of what is “in trade or commerce”and who is a “consumer”. Two other bodies of law are also discussed, namely the High Court’s position on “adequacy of information”of EISs and the relevant law concerning expert evidence.

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Trade law.