Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:25:18.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

United Kingdom Case Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Alona E. Evans
Alona E. Evans*
Affiliation:
Of the Board of Editors
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

International law and municipal lawwhether convention not incorporated nor referred to in statute can be used to clarity statutory ambiguityConvention on the Valuation of Goods for Customs Purposes, 1950
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , July 1967 , pp. 817 - 818
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Convention on the Valuation of Goods for Customs Purposes, Cmd. 8245 (1951), Cmd. 9233 (Treaty Series No. 49) (1954). [Footnote by the Court.]

2 [1966] 3 All E.B. 871 at 874. Justice Diplock commented at length upon the use of the Convention for the purpose of interpreting the language of the statute. In his opinion the term “normal price” in the statute meant actual retail price in the place of origin of the product plus the cost of carriage, and the terms of the Convention supported this construction of the statute. Justice Russell also agreed that the Convention could be used for interpretative purposes despite the absence of any reference to the Convention in the statute.