In recent years, the general trend has shifted from an excessively literal approach to treaty interpretation to what has been known as a “targeted” approach. WHEREAS Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1932/2006 provides that, for these six countries, the visa waiver shall apply only from the date of entry into force of a visa waiver agreement to be concluded by the European Community with the country concerned, the task is to determine which clause or declaration of the document takes precedence over the other. It is a question of looking at the treaty as a whole. I also noticed that between an American version and a European version, one of Amazon`s agreements (very similar) uses the American version “controls” and the European version “prevails”. 3. The visa waiver provided for in this Agreement shall apply without prejudice to the legislation of the Contracting Parties on conditions of entry and short stay. Member States and Seychelles reserve the right to refuse entry into their territory and their short-term stay in their territory if one or more of these conditions are not met. 1. This Agreement shall be ratified or approved by the Parties in accordance with their respective internal procedures and shall enter into force on the first day of the second month following the date on which the Parties notify each other of the completion of the above-mentioned procedures. A good starting point, when there is an ambiguous or contradictory provision within a treaty, is the revision of the order of priority, which is typically defined in the document.
This classification classifies the documents of the treaty so that the priority documents are clear. In the examples below, the agreements are so similar that the word modification seems intentional. It is not as if they are totally different agreements; It is clear that someone started the foreign version and edited it to adapt it to his jurisprudence. This begs the question: what is the meaning of word choice? 4. Either Party may suspend all or part of this Agreement, in particular on grounds of public policy, the protection of national security or the protection of public health, illegal immigration or the restoration of a visa requirement by a Party. . . .