In addition to analyzing and discussing the ramifications of the Court's decision, the Nucleonics Week article describes the varied reaction to the decision in the U.S. and abroad.
Importantly, the article notes that this case is far from over. The article quotes counsel for Areva, the current owner of Eurodif, as saying that:
"[The Eurodif] case that the Supreme Court took was only one of a group of related cases. The others were put on hold until the underlying goods-versus-services issue was resolved. Areva will continue to challenge a finding by the US International Trade Commission that the US domestic industry was injured by the imports from Areva . . . and Areva also will pursue cases in which it is questioning the specifics of Commerce’s findings in its review of the case. . . "The article also indicates that the European Commission will closely examine this decision and that the European Court of Justice "ruled in 2006 that separative work is a service, not a good, mirroring the jurisprudence of US courts at the time" and that is likely "that the difference between US and EU jurisprudence on SWU imports would eventually cause “someone” in Europe to challenge the ECJ decision."
The Eurodif article starts in the center on page one of the publication and continues on to pages 11-13.
Editors Note: Nucleonics Week is published 51 times per year by Platts, a division of McGraw-Hill Companies. The linked article is copyrighted and is reprinted by permission.
Full disclosure: Doug Jacobson, the editor of International Trade Law News is quoted in the article.
0 comments:
Post a Comment