[本篇论文由上帝论文网为您收集整理，上帝论文网http://paper.5var.com将为您整理更多优秀的免费论文，谢谢您的支持]
ChapterVII
　　SpecialRulesforAnti-dumpingDisputes
　　
　　OUTLINE
　　
　　SectionOneRecourseofAnti-dumpingDisputestotheDSB
　　IIntroduction
　　IISufficiencyofPanelRequestundertheADAgreement
　　(i)Art.6.2oftheDSUandArticle17.4oftheADAgreement
　　(ii)Art.6.2oftheDSUandArticle17.5(i)oftheADAgreement
　　(iii)ASummaryGuiding
　　IIIGeneralLegalBasisforClaimsagainstLegislationasSuch
　　IVSpecialRulesforClaimsagainstAnti-dumpingLegislationasSuch
　　(i)Introduction
　　（ii）GeneralLegalBasisunderArt.17oftheADAgreement
　　(iii)UnderstandingofArt.17.4oftheADAgreement
　　(iv)ExtensiveBasisinContext
　　(v)ASummary
　　SectionTwoAdhocStandardofReviewforAnti-dumpingDisputes
　　IIntroduction
　　IISpecialStandardofReviewundertheADAgreement:inGeneral
　　(i)AdhocApproachestoDomesticDetermination:Art.17.6
　　(ii)RelationshipbetweenArt.11oftheDSUandArt.17.6oftheADAgreement
　　(iii)ASummaryGuiding
　　IIIScopeofReviewofFact-findings:Art.17.5(ii)oftheADAgreement
　　(i)OverviewoftheGATTPractice
　　(ii)ConcernedRulingsinReportsIssuedbyWTOPanels
　　(iii)TentativeRemarks:GuidancefromtheAppellateBody
　　
　　
　　
　　SectionOne
　　RecourseofAnti-dumpingDisputestotheDSB
　　
　　IIntroduction
　　ComparedtothelegallyfragmentedpreviousGATTdisputesettlementsystem,thenewWTOdisputesettlementsystemisanintegratedsystemwithmuchbroaderjurisdictionandlessscopefor“ruleshopping”and“forumshopping”.However,accordingtoArt.1.2oftheDSUwhichstatesinpartthat,“[t]herulesandproceduresofthisUnderstandingshallapplysubjecttosuchspecialoradditionalrulesandproceduresondisputesettlementcontainedinthecoveredagreementsasareidentifiedinAppendix2tothisUnderstanding”,manycoveredagreementsundertheWTOjurisdictioncontinuetoincludespecialdisputesettlementrulesandprocedures.SuchspecialrulesandproceduresarelistedinAppendix2totheDSU.Andinthischapter,wewillfocusonsuchspecialdisputesettlementrulesconcerninganti-dumpingdisputes,i.e.Arts.17.4through17.7oftheAnti-dumpingAgreement(‘theADAgreement’).
　　AnanalysisoftheDSBpracticesuggestsaseparatecontributionofthischaptertothisbook,meritedbydisputesettlementproceedingsintheanti-dumpingfield.Inthischapter,theauthorfocusesonthetwomainissuesrepeatedlyraised,aspreliminaryorproceduralissues,duringdisputesettlementregardinganti-dumping.Oneistheissueofrecourseofanti-dumpingdisputestotheDSB,whichdealsmainlywithArts.17.4and17.5(i)oftheADAgreement;theotheroneistheissueofstandardofreviewinanti-dumpingareas,whichrunsmostonArt.17.6,includingArt.17.5(ii),oftheADAgreement.Andinthissectionwewillfocusonthefirstone.Inthisrespect,Arts.17.4and17.5(i)oftheADAgreementstates:
　　
　　“17.4IftheMemberthatrequestedconsultationsconsidersthattheconsultationspursuanttoparagraph3havefailedtoachieveamutuallyagreedsolution,andiffinalactionhasbeentakenbytheadministeringauthoritiesoftheimportingMembertolevydefinitiveanti-dumpingdutiesortoacceptpriceundertakings,itmayreferthemattertotheDisputeSettlementBody(“DSB”).WhenaprovisionalmeasurehasasignificantimpactandtheMemberthatrequestedconsultationsconsidersthatthemeasurewastakencontrarytotheprovisionsofparagraph1ofArticle7,thatMembermayalsorefersuchmattertotheDSB.
　　17.5TheDSBshall,attherequestofcomplainingparty,establishapaneltoexaminethematterbasedupon:
　　(i)    awrittenstatementoftheMembermakingtherequestindicatinghowabenefitaccruingtoit,directlyorindirectly,underthisAgreementhasbeennullifiedorimpaired,orthattheachievingoftheobjectivesoftheAgreementisbeingimpeded,and
　　(ii)    …”
　　IISufficiencyofPanelRequestundertheADAgreement
　　Generally,asnotedinpreviously,itisonlywheretheprovisionsoftheDSUandthespecialoradditionalrulesandproceduresofacoveredagreementcannotbereadascomplementingeachotherthatthespecialoradditionalprovisionsaretoprevail.AspecialoradditionalprovisionshouldonlybefoundtoprevailoveraprovisionoftheDSUinasituationwhereadherencetotheoneprovisionwillleadtoaviolationoftheotherprovision,thatis,inthecaseofaconflictbetweenthem.ThentheauthormeanstogetdowntotheissueofwhethertheseprovisionscitedabovelimitspanelrequestundertheADAgreementtosomehowotherthanthoserequiredbyArt.6.2oftheDSU.
　　InMexico-HFCS(DS132),thedisputeinvolvestheimpositionofadefinitiveanti-dumpingmeasurebytheMexicanMinistryofTradeandIndustrialDevelopment(SECOFI)onimportsofhigh-fructosecornsyrup(HFCS)fromtheUnitedStates.MexicoarguesthattheUnitedStates’requestforestablishmentofthisPanelisnotconsistentwiththerequirementsofArt.6.2oftheDSUandArt.17.4and17.5(i)oftheADAgreement,andthereforearguesthatthePanelmustterminatetheproceedingwithoutreachingthesubstanceoftheUnitedStates’claims.
　　(i)Art.6.2oftheDSUandArt.17.4oftheADAgreement
　　InconsideringtheallegedfailuretoassertclaimsunderArt.6.2oftheDSUandArt.17.4oftheADAgreement,thePanelrulesthat:1
　　“[W]enotefirstthattheAppellateBodyhasstatedthatArticle6.2oftheDSUandArticle17.4oftheADAgreementarecomplementaryandshouldbeappliedtogetherindisputesundertheADAgreement.Ithasfurtherstatedthat:‘theword“matter”hasthesamemeaninginArticle17oftheAnti-DumpingAgreementasithasinArticle7oftheDSU.Itconsistsoftwoelement:Thespecific“measure”andthe“claims”relatingtoit,bothofwhichmustbeproperlyidentifiedinapanelrequestasrequiredbyArticle6.2oftheDSU.’
　　Moreover,ithasspecifiedthat:‘indisputesundertheAnti-DumpingAgreementrelatingtotheinitiationandconductofanti-dumpinginvestigations,adefinitiveanti-dumpingduty,theacceptanceofapriceundertakingoraprovisionalmeasuremustbeidentifiedaspartofthematterreferredtotheDSBpursuanttotheprovisionsofArticle17.4oftheAnti-DumpingAgreementandArticle6.2oftheDSU.’
　　InconsideringtheargumentsrelatingtoArticle17.4oftheADAgreement,wenotefirstthatArticle17.4doesnot,inourview,setoutanyfurtheroradditionalrequirementswithrespecttothedegreeofspecificitywithwhichclaimsmustbesetforthinarequestforestablishmentchallengingafinalanti-dumpingmeasure.Therefore,arequestforestablishmentthatsatisfiestherequirementsofArticle6.2oftheDSUinthisregardalsosatisfiestherequirementsofArticle17.4oftheADAgreement.
　　[…]
　　InGuatemala-Cement,theAppellateBody,afterfindingthat,inthecas

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]  下一页