WTO与RTAs争端解决机制管辖权冲突问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-17 22:19

本文选题：WTO　切入点：RTAs　出处：《吉林大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：当今世界经济飞速发展，多边贸易自由化与区域经济一体化日益成为主要的经济发展方式，，尤其在多边贸易谈判步履维艰的情况下，区域经济一体化更是充分显示出其发展的优势作用，区域贸易协定不断涌现，并都规定有相应的争端解决机制，其与世界贸易组织争端解决机制之间的矛盾冲突也随之出现。WTO与RTAs之间的关系问题日益成为学者们关注的焦点，学者们纷纷从宏观的角度论述WTO与RTAs争端解决机制的比较，鲜有学者深入研究WTO和RTAs争端解决机制管辖权冲突的相关问题，这不利于全面认识WTO与RTAs之间的矛盾冲突，不利于国际贸易纠纷的有效解决。本文从概述WTO争端解决机制和RTAs争端解决机制中有关管辖权的规定入手，在此基础上比较并探讨两者的关系，认为虽然WTO与RTAs在条文方面有一些相似规定，但两者在争端解决机构、争端解决受案范围、争端解决程序方面有很多不同，这促使RTAs在诸多领域的优先发展可以弥补WTO争端解决机制的疏漏，为WTO争端解决机制的未来发展提供了经验和教训。为什么WTO争端解决解决机制与RTAs争端解决机制会发生管辖权冲突呢？其根本原因是WTO协定与RTAs规定的实体权利义务的重叠以及WTO与RTAs争端解决机制管辖权制度的不协调，这两方面的原因为冲突产生提供理论上的可能性；而直接原因是争端方挑选争端解决机构，它直接促使管辖权冲突的实际发生。 WTO争端解决机制与RTAs争端解决机制管辖权冲突的后果是产生平行诉讼，其主要表现为“重复诉讼”和“对抗诉讼”，而其典型案例分别是“阿根廷家禽反倾销措施案”和“墨西哥饮料案”。从这两个案例可以看出平行诉讼会造成的两方面的严重后果：一是高额诉讼成本，同时加重争端当事方和争端解决机构的负担，不符合司法经济原则；二是产生冲突的裁决，降低裁决的可预见性，进而降低法律的确定性，日益加深多边贸易体制与区域经济一体化间的矛盾，不利于国际经济秩序的和谐与统一。鉴于上述严重后果，必须找出协调这一冲突的方案，分别从RTAs中的管辖权条款、国际私法领域的管辖权规制规则、RTAs对WTO在管辖权方面的司法包容这三个角度分析可适用的解决方案。首先，RTAs争端解决机制中的管辖权条款是对争端国诉讼权利义务的规制，并不是对WTO特定条款的解释，因此不能根据“并入说”要求WTO专家组和上诉机构承认RTAs管辖权条款。其次，国际私法领域的管辖权规制规则，如不方便法院原则、先受理法院管辖原则、一事不再理原则和禁止反言原则，在协调WTO与RTAs争端解决机制管辖权冲突方面均具有局限性。最后，RTAs对WTO在管辖权方面的司法包容有利于两种争端解决机制在实现各自目标宗旨的基础上共同发展，可视为协调WTO与RTAs争端解决机制管辖权冲突的有效途径。就中国而言，应如何解决这一冲突呢？首先要深入研究WTO条款和管辖权冲突典型案例，然后要充分利用这种冲突对己有利的一面。
[Abstract]:The rapid development of world economy, multilateral trade liberalization and regional economic integration has become the main mode of economic development, especially in the multilateral trade negotiations said of an aged person situation, regional economic integration is fully shown its advantages in the development of the role of regional trade agreements continue to emerge, and the corresponding provisions of the dispute settlement mechanism, and the the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Mechanism between the contradictions and conflicts also arise problems of the relationship between.WTO and RTAs has become the focus of scholars, more scholars from the macroscopic angle discusses WTO and RTAs dispute settlement mechanism, few scholars have in-depth study of the WTO and the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism under the jurisdiction of the relevant rights conflict, it is conducive to a comprehensive understanding of the conflict between WTO and RTAs, are not conducive to solve international trade disputes.
This paper outlines the WTO dispute settlement mechanism of RTAs dispute settlement provisions and the jurisdiction mechanism of rights, on the basis of comparing and discussing the relationship between WTO and RTAs, although there are some similar provisions in respect of the provisions, but the two institutions in solving disputes, dispute settlement scope, dispute settlement procedures are very different. This prompted RTAs to give priority to the development in many fields can make up the WTO dispute settlement mechanism of omission, provides experiences and lessons for the future development of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism.
Why does the WTO dispute settlement mechanism and the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism have the jurisdictional conflict? The basic reason is the provisions of the WTO agreement and the rights and obligations of the entity RTAs and WTO overlap and the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism under the jurisdiction of the right system is not harmonious, these two reasons for the conflict to provide theoretical possibility; and the direct reason is a party to the dispute choose dispute settlement mechanism, actual it directly led to the occurrence of conflicts of jurisdiction.
The WTO dispute settlement mechanism of RTAs dispute settlement mechanism is the consequence of the conflict between the right of jurisdiction to produce parallel litigation, the main manifestation of "repeated litigation" and "against the lawsuit", and the typical cases are "Argentina poultry anti-dumping case" and "Mexico beverage case". From these two cases can be seen in parallel proceedings from two aspects of the serious consequences: one is the high cost of litigation, and increase the parties to the dispute and the dispute settlement body burden, does not comply with the principle of judicial economy; the two is the conflict between ruling, ruling the lower predictability, and reduce the certainty of law, deepening the contradiction between the multilateral trading system and regional economy the integration of the harmony and unity is not conducive to international economic order.
In view of the serious consequences, we must find out the coordination of the conflict, the jurisdiction clause from RTAs respectively, the rules of jurisdiction regulation in the field of private international law, the RTAs of WTO in the jurisdiction of the judicial tolerance in three aspects the solution can be used. First of all, the jurisdiction clause in the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism is the regulation of disputes litigation rights and obligations, and not to WTO specific interpretation of terms, and therefore can not be "incorporation" according to the requirements of WTO panels and the appellate body recognized RTAs jurisdiction clause. Secondly, rules of jurisdiction regulation in the field of private international law, such as inconvenient court principle, court received the first principle, one thing the principle and the principle of estoppel, the coordination of the WTO and the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism of jurisdictional conflicts have limitations. Finally, RTAs to two WTO in the dispute on the jurisdiction of judicial tolerance The solution mechanism can be seen as an effective way to coordinate the conflict of the jurisdiction of the WTO and the RTAs dispute settlement mechanism on the basis of the realization of the objectives of their respective goals.
For China, how should we solve this conflict? First, we should thoroughly study the typical cases of WTO clauses and jurisdiction conflicts, and then make full use of this conflict to our advantage.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996.1

【参考文献】