WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7.docx
- 文档编号:13107624
- 上传时间:2023-06-11
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:10
- 大小:19.03KB
WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7.docx
《WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7.docx(10页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7
WTODisputeSettlementMechanism(7)
ChapterVII
SpecialRulesforAnti-dumpingDisputes
OUTLINE
SectionOneRecourseofAnti-dumpingDisputestotheDSB
IIntroduction
IISufficiencyofPanelRequestundertheADAgreement
(i)Art.oftheDSUandArticleoftheADAgreement
(ii)Art.oftheDSUandArticle(i)oftheADAgreement
(iii)ASummaryGuiding
IIIGeneralLegalBasisforClaimsagainstLegislationasSuch
IVSpecialRulesforClaimsagainstAnti-dumpingLegislationasSuch
(i)Introduction
(ii)GeneralLegalBasisunderArt.17oftheADAgreement
(iii)UnderstandingofArt.oftheADAgreement
(iv)ExtensiveBasisinContext
(v)ASummary
SectionTwoAdhocStandardofReviewforAnti-dumpingDisputes
IIntroduction
IISpecialStandardofReviewundertheADAgreement:
inGeneral
(i)AdhocApproachestoDomesticDetermination:
Art.
(ii)RelationshipbetweenArt.11oftheDSUandArt.oftheADAgreement
(iii)ASummaryGuiding
IIIScopeofReviewofFact-findings:
Art.(ii)oftheADAgreement
(i)OverviewoftheGATTPractice
(ii)ConcernedRulingsinReportsIssuedbyWTOPanels
(iii)TentativeRemarks:
GuidancefromtheAppellateBody
SectionOne
RecourseofAnti-dumpingDisputestotheDSB
IIntroduction
ComparedtothelegallyfragmentedpreviousGATTdisputesettlementsystem,thenewWTOdisputesettlementsystemisanintegratedsystemwithmuchbroaderjurisdictionandlessscopefor“ruleshopping”and“forumshopping”.However,accordingtoArt.oftheDSUwhichstatesinpartthat,“[t]herulesandproceduresofthisUnderstandingshallapplysubjecttosuchspecialoradditionalrulesandproceduresondisputesettlementcontainedinthecoveredagreementsasareidentifiedinAppendix2tothisUnderstanding”,manycoveredagreementsundertheWTOjurisdictioncontinuetoincludespecialdisputesettlementrulesandprocedures.SuchspecialrulesandproceduresarelistedinAppendix2totheDSU.Andinthischapter,wewillfocusonsuchspecialdisputesettlementrulesconcerninganti-dumpingdisputes,Arts.throughoftheAnti-dumpingAgreement(‘theADAgreement’).
AnanalysisoftheDSBpracticesuggestsaseparatecontributionofthischaptertothisbook,meritedbydisputesettlementproceedingsintheanti-dumpingfield.Inthischapter,theauthorfocusesonthetwomainissuesrepeatedlyraised,aspreliminaryorproceduralissues,duringdisputesettlementregardinganti-dumping.Oneistheissueofrecourseofanti-dumpingdisputestotheDSB,whichdealsmainlywithArts.and(i)oftheADAgreement;theotheroneistheissueofstandardofreviewinanti-dumpingareas,whichrunsmostonArt.,includingArt.(ii),oftheADAgreement.Andinthissectionwewillfocusonthefirstone.Inthisrespect,Arts.and(i)oftheADAgreement
states:
“IftheMemberthatrequestedconsultationsconsidersthattheconsultationspursuanttoparagraph3havefailedtoachieveamutuallyagreedsolution,andiffinalactionhasbeentakenbytheadministeringauthoritiesoftheimportingMembertolevydefinitiveanti-dumpingdutiesortoacceptpriceundertakings,itmayreferthemattertotheDisputeSettlementBody(“DSB”).WhenaprovisionalmeasurehasasignificantimpactandtheMemberthatrequestedconsultationsconsidersthatthemeasurewastakencontrarytotheprovisionsofparagraph1ofArticle7,thatMembermayalsorefersuchmattertotheDSB.
TheDSBshall,attherequestofplainingparty,establishapaneltoexaminethematterbasedupon:
(i)awrittenstatementoftheMembermakingtherequestindicatinghowabenefitaccruingtoit,directlyorindirectly,underthisAgreementhasbeennullifiedorimpaired,orthattheachievingoftheobjectivesoftheAgreementisbeingimpeded,and
(ii)…”
IISufficiencyofPanelRequestundertheADAgreement
Generally,asnotedinpreviously,itisonlywheretheprovisionsoftheDSUandthespecialoradditionalrulesandproceduresofacoveredagreementcannotbereadasplementingeachotherthatthespecialoradditionalprovisionsaretoprevail.AspecialoradditionalprovisionshouldonlybefoundtoprevailoveraprovisionoftheDSUinasituationwhereadherencetotheoneprovisionwillleadtoaviolationoftheotherprovision,thatis,inthecaseofaconflictbetweenthem.ThentheauthormeanstogetdowntotheissueofwhethertheseprovisionscitedabovelimitspanelrequestundertheADAgreementtosomehowotherthanthoserequiredbyArt.oftheDSU.
InMexico-HFCS(DS132),thedisputeinvolvestheimpositionofadefinitiveanti-dumpingmeasurebytheMexicanMinistryofTradeandIndustrialDevelopment(SECOFI)onimportsofhigh-fructosecornsyrup(HFCS)fromtheUnitedStates.MexicoarguesthattheUnitedStates’requestforestablishmentofthisPanelisnotconsistentwiththerequirementsofArt.oftheDSUandArt.and(i)oftheADAgreement,andthereforearguesthatthePanelmustterminatetheproceedingwithoutreachingthesubstanceoftheUnitedStates’claims.
(i)Art.oftheDSUandArt.oftheADAgreement
InconsideringtheallegedfailuretoassertclaimsunderArt.oftheDSUandArt.oftheADAgreement,thePanelrulesthat:
1
“[W]enotefirstthattheAppellateBodyhasstatedthatArticleoftheDSUandArticleoftheADAgreementareplementaryandshouldbeappliedtogetherindisputesundertheADAgreement.Ithasfurtherstatedthat:
‘theword“matter”hasthesamemeaninginArticle17oftheAnti-DumpingAgreementasithasinArticle7oftheDSU.Itconsistsoftwoelement:
Thespecific“measure”andthe“claims”relatingtoit,bothofwhichmustbeproperlyidenti
fiedinapanelrequestasrequiredbyArticleoftheDSU.’
Moreover,ithasspecifiedthat:
‘indisputesundertheAnti-DumpingAgreementrelatingtotheinitiationandconductofanti-dumpinginvestigations,adefinitiveanti-dumpingduty,theacceptanceofapriceundertakingoraprovisionalmeasuremustbeidentifiedaspartofthematterreferredtotheDSBpursuanttotheprovisionsofArticleoftheAnti-DumpingAgreementandArticleoftheDSU.’
InconsideringtheargumentsrelatingtoArticleoftheADAgreement,wenotefirstthatArticledoesnot,inourview,setoutanyfurtheroradditionalrequirementswithrespecttothedegreeofspecificitywithwhichclaimsmustbesetforthinarequestforestablishmentchallengingafinalanti-dumpingmeasure.Therefore,arequestforestablishmentthatsatisfiestherequirementsofArticleoftheDSUinthisregardalsosatisfiestherequirementsofArticleoftheADAgreement.
[…]
InGuatemala-Cement,theAppellateBody,afterfindingthat,inthecaseofadisputeundertheADAgreement,therequestforestablishmentmustidentifyadefinitiveanti-dumpingduty,theacceptanceofapriceundertakingoraprovisionalmeasureasaspecificmeasureatissue,wentontoaddressthequestionoftheclaimsthatmightbeincludedinadisputeundertheADAgreement.
‘Thisrequirementtoidentifyaspecificanti-dumpingmeasureatissueinapanelrequestinnowaylimitsthenatureoftheclaimsthatmaybebroughtconcerningallegednullificationorimpairmentofbenefitsortheimpedingoftheachievementofanyobjectiveinadisputeundertheADAgreement.Aswehaveobservedearlier,thereisadifferencebetweenthespecificmeasuresatissue--inthecaseoftheAnti-DumpingAgreement,oneofthethreetypesofanti-dumpingmeasuredescribedinArticle--andtheclaimsorthelegalbasisoftheplaintreferredtotheDSBrelatingtothosespecificmeasures.’
TheAppellateBodyReportinGuatemala-Cementindicatesthataplainantmay,havingidentifiedaspecificanti-dumpingdutyinitsrequestforestablishment,bringanyclaimsundertheADAgreementrelatingtothatspecificmeasure.Thatthereshouldbearelationshipbetweenthemeasurechallengedinadisputeandtheclaimsassertedinthatdisputewouldappearnecessary,giventhatArticleoftheDSUrequiresthat,‘whereapanelortheAppellateBodyconcludesthatameasureisinconsistentwithacoveredagreement,itshallremendthattheMemberconcernedbringthemeasureintoconformitywiththeagreement’…”
(ii)Art.oftheDSUandArt.(i)oftheADAgreement
MexicoalsocontendsthattheUnitedStates’requestforestablishmentisinsufficientunderArt.(i)oftheADAgreementbecauseitdoesnotindicatehowMexico’sfinalanti-dumpingmeasurenullifiesorimpairsbenefitsaccruingtotheUnitedStatesundertheADAgreement,and
doesnotindicatehowtheachievingoftheobjectivesoftheADAgreementwasbeingimpededbythatmeasure.Inconsideringthisissue,thePanelruleinpertinentas:
2
“[W]enoteArticle(i)oftheADAgreement,whichprovides:
‘TheDSBshall,attherequestoftheplainingparty,establishapaneltoexaminethematterbasedupon:
(i)AwrittenstatementoftheMembermakingtherequestindicatinghowabenefitaccruingtoit,directlyorindirectly,underthisAgreement,hasbeennullifiedorimpaired,orthattheachievingoftheobjectivesoftheAgreementisbeingimpeded.’
TheUnitedStates’requestforestablishmentdoesnotusethewords‘nullifiedorimpaired’,northewords‘theachievingoftheobjectivesoftheAgreementisbeingimpeded’.However,itdoesallegespecificviolationsofitsrightsandMexico’sobligationsundertheADAgreement,whichisa‘coveredagreement’undertheDSU.
TheAppellateBodyhasruledthattheprovisionsoftheDSUmustbereadtogetherwiththeprovisionsofspecialoradditionalrulesfordisputesettlementincoveredagreements,suchasthosesetforthinArticleoftheADAgreement,unlessthereisadifferencebetweenthem.TheAppellateBodyhasfurtherruled,
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- WTODisputeSettlementMechanism7