论WTO与RTAS争端解决的管辖权冲突与协调
发布时间：2018-09-13 08:18
【摘要】：近年来,随着区域贸易安排的迅猛发展,WTO和区域贸易安排的争端解决机制的并存情况已经成为一个不争的事实,同时,WTO体系下的DSU(《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》)并未涉及区域贸易安排的争端管辖权的规定,仅对自身的管辖权作出了规定。现行WTO与区域贸易安排关于管辖权的规定不可避免的导致了两者之间管辖权的冲突,那么当争端发生时,成员方如何选择争端解决机构?亦或是先后或者同时向不同的争端解决机构提交了解决争端的申请,该机构又该如何处理?本文采用实证分析与比较分析相结合的方法来探讨协调WTO与RTAs争端解决机制的管辖权冲突问题,通过比较分析北美自由贸易区和欧盟的实践,对WTO与RTAs争端解决机制的管辖权冲突的产生原因以及协调途径等几个基本问题进行了初步探讨,并结合具体的案例进行详尽的剖析,提出相应的观点或者解决方案,以期望能够协调WTO与RTAs之间的运行关系,在WTO和其他的其他区域贸易安排之间合理分配管辖权,对于中国——东盟自由贸易区的争端解决机制作出适当的剖析,结合我国的国情探讨如何有效的利用该机制,真正维护我国合法权益。本文共分为四个章节。 第一章从WTO与区域贸易安排的关系的角度入手,分析了区域贸易安排的发展对WTO带来的影响,并且比较了两者的争端解决的特点。 第二章研究了WTO与区域贸易安排争端解决的管辖权冲突的表现以及这一冲突产生的原因,同时借由墨西哥饮料案的管辖权竞合问题来详细说明了“管辖排除条款”有效性问题。 第三章承接管辖权冲突的产生,探讨了两者冲突的协调问题,其中包括冲突的协调方法和原则,另外还分析了北美自由贸易区和欧盟的争端解决机制,以期提供借鉴和启示。 第四章研究了中国——东盟自由贸易区与WTO的争端解决管辖权的冲突与协调问题,分析了CAFTA的现状和《中国——东盟关于争端解决机制的协议》的特点以及两者的冲突协调问题,最后提出我国应采取的对策建议。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the rapid development of regional trade arrangements (RTAs), it has become an indisputable fact that WTO and the dispute settlement mechanism of RTAs coexist. At the same time, the DSU (understanding on the rules and procedures of dispute settlement) does not deal with the dispute jurisdiction of regional trade arrangements, but only its own jurisdiction. The existing provisions of WTO and RTA on jurisdiction inevitably lead to the conflict of jurisdiction between the two parties, so when the dispute occurs, how does the member choose the dispute settlement body? Or if a dispute settlement application has been submitted to a different dispute settlement body successively or simultaneously, what should be done by the dispute settlement body? This paper uses the method of combining empirical analysis and comparative analysis to discuss the conflict of jurisdiction in the dispute settlement mechanism between WTO and RTAs, and analyzes the practice of North American Free Trade area (NAFTA) and European Union (EU). This paper discusses the causes of jurisdiction conflict between WTO and RTAs dispute settlement mechanism and some basic problems, such as the ways of coordination and so on, and makes a detailed analysis in combination with specific cases, and puts forward the corresponding viewpoints or solutions. In order to coordinate the operational relationship between WTO and RTAs and distribute jurisdiction between WTO and other regional trade arrangements reasonably, this paper makes an appropriate analysis of the dispute settlement mechanism of China-ASEAN Free Trade area. This paper discusses how to make effective use of this mechanism in order to protect our legal rights and interests. This paper is divided into four chapters. The first chapter analyzes the influence of the development of regional trade arrangement on WTO from the angle of the relationship between WTO and RTA, and compares the characteristics of dispute settlement between RTA and RTA. The second chapter studies the conflict of jurisdiction between WTO and RTA and the causes of the conflict, and explains the validity of jurisdiction exclusion clause in detail by the issue of jurisdiction concurrence in the Mexican beverage case. Chapter three deals with the conflict of jurisdiction, discusses the coordination of the conflict, including the methods and principles of conflict, and analyzes the dispute settlement mechanism of the North American Free Trade area and the European Union in order to provide reference and enlightenment. Chapter four studies the conflict and coordination of dispute settlement jurisdiction between China-ASEAN Free Trade area (CAFTA) and WTO. This paper analyzes the present situation of CAFTA, the characteristics of the Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism between China and ASEAN, and the conflict coordination between the two, and finally puts forward some countermeasures and suggestions to be taken by our country.
【学位授予单位】：华侨大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.1
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the rapid development of regional trade arrangements (RTAs), it has become an indisputable fact that WTO and the dispute settlement mechanism of RTAs coexist. At the same time, the DSU (understanding on the rules and procedures of dispute settlement) does not deal with the dispute jurisdiction of regional trade arrangements, but only its own jurisdiction. The existing provisions of WTO and RTA on jurisdiction inevitably lead to the conflict of jurisdiction between the two parties, so when the dispute occurs, how does the member choose the dispute settlement body? Or if a dispute settlement application has been submitted to a different dispute settlement body successively or simultaneously, what should be done by the dispute settlement body? This paper uses the method of combining empirical analysis and comparative analysis to discuss the conflict of jurisdiction in the dispute settlement mechanism between WTO and RTAs, and analyzes the practice of North American Free Trade area (NAFTA) and European Union (EU). This paper discusses the causes of jurisdiction conflict between WTO and RTAs dispute settlement mechanism and some basic problems, such as the ways of coordination and so on, and makes a detailed analysis in combination with specific cases, and puts forward the corresponding viewpoints or solutions. In order to coordinate the operational relationship between WTO and RTAs and distribute jurisdiction between WTO and other regional trade arrangements reasonably, this paper makes an appropriate analysis of the dispute settlement mechanism of China-ASEAN Free Trade area. This paper discusses how to make effective use of this mechanism in order to protect our legal rights and interests. This paper is divided into four chapters. The first chapter analyzes the influence of the development of regional trade arrangement on WTO from the angle of the relationship between WTO and RTA, and compares the characteristics of dispute settlement between RTA and RTA. The second chapter studies the conflict of jurisdiction between WTO and RTA and the causes of the conflict, and explains the validity of jurisdiction exclusion clause in detail by the issue of jurisdiction concurrence in the Mexican beverage case. Chapter three deals with the conflict of jurisdiction, discusses the coordination of the conflict, including the methods and principles of conflict, and analyzes the dispute settlement mechanism of the North American Free Trade area and the European Union in order to provide reference and enlightenment. Chapter four studies the conflict and coordination of dispute settlement jurisdiction between China-ASEAN Free Trade area (CAFTA) and WTO. This paper analyzes the present situation of CAFTA, the characteristics of the Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism between China and ASEAN, and the conflict coordination between the two, and finally puts forward some countermeasures and suggestions to be taken by our country.
【学位授予单位】：华侨大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.1
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 雷蕾;;浅谈欧盟解决民商事管辖权冲突对我国的启示[J];佳木斯教育学院学报;2012年12期
2 王郁;;中国-东盟自由贸易区内我国与东盟国家之间民商事管辖权冲突及其协调[J];企业技术开发;2013年Z1期
3 张淑钿;;论先受理法院机制在涉港案件管辖权冲突中的适用[J];河南省政法管理干部学院学报;2008年05期
4 陈瑾;;浅谈管辖权冲突及其解决[J];当代经理人;2005年05期
5 颜林;;论多边公约体系下的国际民商事案件管辖权冲突及其解决[J];社会科学辑刊;2008年05期
6 王淑敏;;碳捕捉与海底封存的诉讼管辖权冲突研究[J];法学杂志;2013年08期
7 周晓林;;美国法律的域外管辖与国际管辖权冲突[J];国际问题研究;1984年03期
8 茆荣华;论涉外民事管辖权冲突[J];政法学习.新疆公安司法管理干部学院学报;1994年01期
9 刘彬;;论国际贸易协定司法管辖权冲突——迈向功能竞赛[J];云南大学学报(法学版);2011年02期
10 张淑钿;;涉港民事管辖权冲突解决机制的重构[J];法学论坛;2011年06期
相关会议论文 前1条
1 陈姝，
本文编号：2240588
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/guojifa/2240588.html
