The EU internal market is the most comprehensive version of mutual recognition between trading partners. According to the Dijon Cassis principle, a product that can be legally sold in one Member State can be legally sold in any other Member State, even if the rules are not harmonised. By granting mutual recognition of products covered by free trade agreements with Canada and Korea, but which refuse to give the same treatment to products originating in the United Kingdom, the EU could violate WTO legislation. A traditional MRA is a mutual recognition agreement for “compliance assessment.” 84 Member C may also argue that its technical requirements are equivalent to the technical requirements of Member A and require recognition in accordance with Article 2.7 OBT. However, this is not an MFN claim and is not created by Member A`s MRA with Member B. The pre-benefit or advantage conferred by Member State A in the AMR to Member State B is the recognition of the technical rules of a certain quality and, when an MFN claim is invoked, Member C must argue that its technical rules are of the same quality. 15 The communication specifies that in the event of a conflict between a provision of the [GATT] and a provision of another agreement in Schedule 1A [including the OEE] … The definition of the other convention is a priority in the scale of the conflict. In the Brexit negotiations, the UK government called for mutual recognition of the rules, including in Theresa May`s florence speech and as an option for future regulation of financial services, but refused by the EU. What kind of mutual recognition agreements has the EU concluded? Although there has been little progress in accession negotiations, Turkey has gradually expanded its legislation on EU legislation to remove technical barriers. The results of THE CAB tests notified by Turkey are mutually recognised in the EU (and vice versa). 100 A third member could also say that his technical regulations or CAPs are equivalent to those of the first member, but this right would be based on the non-MFN obligations of TBT 2.7 (for technical regulations) or TBT 6.1 (for CAPs), obligations that pre-exist prior to the recognition of the technical rules of a second member or PMCs, and which are not created by the recognition of the technical rules or CAPs of a second member. 16 See Bartels , above in Note 5, 715 (note 86), arguing that opposing rights and prohibitions are considered conflicts in accordance with the general interpretation note of Schedule 1A; But cf.
Trachtman, at p. 5, 472, on the grounds that the interpretive note only covers the circumstances “where one agreement requires, which another prohibits.” However, European Commission trade negotiators recently rejected mutual recognition of the compliance assessment by UK testing laboratories. CEPs are usually concluded with candidate countries with which the EU has association agreements (see our presentation on association agreements) and are a step in the accession process. The aim of the EPCA is to bring the technical rules of a candidate country in line with those of the EU in terms of preparation for EU membership. This type of MRA is by nature temporary, as it disappears when the country joins the EU internal market. 96 This is sometimes referred to as “closed” mutual recognition. See James Mathis, “Addressing Transatlantic Regulatory Barriers: Can the US and the EU Create an Effective Equivalency Instrument?”, in Elaine Fahey and Deirdre Curtin (note. M), A Transatlantic Community of Law: Legal Perspectives on the Relationship between the EU and LEGAL Orders (2014) 186, at Note 38; Trachtman, supra note 5, at 459, 481. The UK document reaffirms the importance of regulatory autonomy – “respect for the regulatory law of each party” – but also follows earlier considerations by proposing that the agreement “creates a framework for both parties to require the other to consider its technical regulation as equivalent to its own regulation.”