Abstract

The judgment of the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") in Petrotub represents a good opportunity to readdress some of the questions surrounding the enforceability of WTO law in the European Community ("EC") legal order. In Petrotub, the ECJ confirmed a key opening in its case law through which private parties can invoke WTO law to test the legality of Community acts. Pursuant to this line of case law, better known as the Nakajima doctrine, WTO law can serve as a ground for review in cases where the EC intends to implement a particular obligation entered into within the framework of the WTO. The ECJ, first in Portugal v. Council and later in OGT Fruchthandelsgesellschaft, and the Court of First Instance ("CFI"), in some of the banana judgments, had advocated a narrow interpretation of the Nakajima doctrine. The judgment of the ECJ in Petrotub confirms that the Nakajima line of case law has not been abandoned.