[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I, on the other hand, would be very happy if you were leading the British side of these negotiations.

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:01 ----------


Life's unfair, Seph, you have to get over it.

In this instance, I imagine two things determine this:
- There's very little time left to strike a deal. Adopting an existing mechanism is easier than devising a new one.
- Scale of trade. This is far more significant between the UK and EU than between the EU and Canada or Japan. Hence more disputes are likely. Having an existing infrastructure in place can move more rapidly than having to rope in 15 judges from elsewhere.

.... but that would be unfair. And that is the key difference between us.

Btw, I was reading up on the EFTA dispute mechanism (as per Norway). EFTA.int

The EFTA Court, based in Luxembourg, corresponds to the Court of Justice of the European Union in matters relating to the EEA EFTA States. The Court deals with infringement actions brought by the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) against an EFTA State with regard to the implementation, application or interpretation of an EEA rule. The Court also handles the settlement of disputes between two or more EEA EFTA States. It hears appeals against decisions taken by ESA and gives advisory opinions to courts in the EEA EFTA States on the interpretation of EEA rules.

The EFTA countries don’t submit to the ECJ either, notwithstanding their proximity.