国际贸易争端管辖冲突研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 06:18

本文选题：WTO + 区域贸易协定　；参考：《上海外国语大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：近年来,世界贸易组织多哈回合谈判停滞不前,各国纷纷通过区域性经济体制促进经济贸易的进一步发展。随着区域性经济体制的增加,WTO及其法律制度逐渐受到了影响与冲击,不同的区域性体制构建不同的争端解决机制,进而产生管辖权冲突等问题的可能性也日渐提高。根据《关税及贸易总协定》第24条、授权条款及《服务贸易总协定》第5条的规定,WTO成员国可以同时拥有区域贸易协定成员的双重身份。因此,争端解决机制选择的不同导致了管辖权冲突。这一问题将带来判决冲突等一系列问题,不利于国际贸易秩序的稳定及国际贸易法律秩序有序发展。鉴于此,对二者冲突进行协调十分必要。中国在WTO具有一国四席的特殊地位,同时又积极与多个国家和地区开展区域贸易协定谈判,推进区域经济一体化的进程。在二者争端解决机制下发生的管辖权冲突的情况已有先例,这一议题的研究对我国处理国际贸易争端时对管辖权冲突的处理也有很大的借鉴作用和参考价值。基于此,本文通过对WTO与区域贸易协定争端解决机制下的管辖权冲突现状的梳理,从而尝试从法律规范的角度对这一问题进行分析,进而以实践中解决方式为基础提出可行性建议。在这一思路下,本文主要分为三个部分,各部分主要内容如下:第一部分:从管辖权冲突问题的发生说起,对管辖权冲突的原因进行研究。管辖权冲突的情形分为两类:一为争端一方在WTO与RTA重复申诉、二为争端各方在WTO与区域贸易协定分别申诉。通过对加拿大软木案、巴西家禽案和墨西哥软饮料案的分析将问题引出,并对原因进行分析。本文认为,管辖权冲突发生的原因主要有.:管辖范围的重叠、管辖权的制度差异、当事方的利益平衡三点。并围绕此三点进行了深入讨论。第二部分:WTO与区域贸易协定中关于争端解决管辖问题的规定。这一部分从条文入手,对WTO及区域贸易协定下的管辖权规则分别进行了分析。目的在于从规则的角度,以条文分析的方式研究WTO及区域贸易协定对于相互之间的管辖权冲突问题的认定,进而对区域贸易协定下调和管辖权冲突的管辖权选择条款的有效性进行了进一步分析。该类条款虽然在制度设计上考虑到了管辖权冲突情形的出现,但实则只能对区域贸易协定下的争端解决机构产生单向效力,而无法在区域贸易协定的范围之外,对WTO争端解决机构产生任何约束力。第三部分:协调冲突的路径——管辖冲突问题的解决。这一部分结合前两章的案例分析,提炼出实践中现行的调和管辖权冲突的三种方式:其一为通过区域贸易协定中管辖权选择条款进行调和;其二为WTO上诉机构通过法律障碍进行调和;其三为通过国际法原则的运用对管辖权冲突进行调和。通过对上述三种方式的研究,尝试提出在现行法律规范的基础上,结合国际私法领域及其他国际组织已有实践及相关制度对管辖权冲突问题的解决提出相应建议并可行性分析。借鉴国际法院、国际刑事法院、国际投资争端解决中心等其他国家组织中对管辖权及可受理性概念的区分,进而将其与区域贸易协定之间的管辖权冲突以及上述一事不再理等国际法原则视为WTO行使管辖权的法律障碍拒绝对案件行使管辖的方式,也是实践中较为务实的做法。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the Doha Round negotiations of the world trade organization have stagnated. Countries have promoted the further development of economic and trade through regional economic systems. With the increase of regional economic system, the WTO and its legal system are gradually affected and impacted. Different regional systems build different dispute settlement mechanisms, and then produce management. The possibility of conflict of jurisdiction and other issues is increasing. In accordance with the general agreement on Tariffs and trade (GATT) twenty-fourth, the provisions of the authorization clause and the fifth article of the general agreement on trade in services, the WTO member states can have the dual identity of the members of the regional trade agreements. Therefore, the difference in the choice of the dispute settlement mechanism leads to the conflict of jurisdiction. It is not conducive to the stability of the international trade order and the orderly development of the legal order of international trade. In view of this, it is necessary to coordinate the conflict between the two parties. China has a special position of four seats in WTO, and actively negotiations with a number of countries and regions to open regional trade agreements to advance the regional economy. There is a precedent in the case of the conflict of jurisdiction in the two party dispute settlement mechanism. The study of this topic also has a great reference and reference value for the handling of the conflict of jurisdiction in China's handling of international trade disputes. Based on this, this article through the jurisdiction of the dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO and the regional trade agreement. The present situation of the right conflict is combed, so as to try to analyze the problem from the perspective of legal norms, and then put forward the feasibility proposal based on the practical solution. Under this idea, this article is divided into three parts, the main contents of each part are as follows: the first part: from the occurrence of the issue of jurisdiction conflict, the conflict of jurisdiction The reasons for the conflict are divided into two categories: one is the repeated complaint by the party in the WTO and the RTA, and the second is the parties to the dispute in WTO and the regional trade agreement. The analysis of the Canadian cork case, the Brazil poultry case and the Mexico soft drink case is cited, and the reasons are analyzed. This article holds that jurisdiction The main reasons are: the overlap of the jurisdiction, the institutional difference of jurisdiction, the balance of the interests of the parties three points. And the three points are discussed in depth. The second part: the provisions on the dispute settlement jurisdiction in the WTO and the regional trade agreements. This part begins with the provisions, and the jurisdiction under the WTO and the regional trade agreements. The right rules are analyzed respectively. The purpose is to study the identification of the conflict of jurisdiction between WTO and regional trade agreements from the perspective of rules, and further analyze the effectiveness of the jurisdiction selection clauses of the regional trade agreements and jurisdiction conflicts. In the design of the system, the conflict of jurisdiction is taken into account, but it can only produce one way effect to the dispute settlement agency under the regional trade agreement, but can not be binding on the WTO dispute settlement body outside the scope of the regional trade agreement. The third part: the path of coordination conflict: the solution of the conflict of jurisdiction. This part combines the case analysis of the first two chapters to extract three ways of the current conflict of harmonized jurisdiction in practice: one is to reconcile the jurisdiction selection clause in the regional trade agreement, and the second is to reconcile the WTO appellate body through legal obstacles; thirdly, the third is to adjust the conflict of jurisdiction through the application of the principles of international law. Through the study of the above three ways, we try to put forward some suggestions and feasibility analysis on the settlement of the conflict of jurisdiction on the basis of the current legal norms and the existing practice and related systems of international private law and other international organizations. It is also a practical practice in practice in other countries, such as the distinction between jurisdiction and the concept of admissibility, and then the conflict between the jurisdiction of the regional trade agreements and the principle of the no longer principle of international law as the legal impediments to the exercise of jurisdiction by the WTO.

【学位授予单位】：上海外国语大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D996.1

【参考文献】