[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]
ChapterVI
　　GeneralRulesofEvidence
　　undertheWTOJurisprudence
　　
　　OUTLINE
　　
　　IBurdenofProofundertheWTOJurisprudence
　　(ⅰ)GeneralRulesWellEstablishedinViolationComplaints
　　(ⅱ)BurdenofProofincaseofInvokinganException
　　(ⅲ)SpecialRulesConcerningNon-ViolationClaims
　　(ⅳ)SummaryandConclusions
　　IIAdmissibilityofCertainEvidences
　　(ⅰ)EvidenceObtainedfromPriorConsultations
　　(a)ProceduralConcern:ConfidentialityofConsultations
　　(b)SubstantialConcern:NecessityorRelevanceofEvidence
　　(ⅱ)ArgumentsbeforeDomesticInvestigativeAuthorities
　　(ⅲ)ArgumentsSubmittedaftertheFirstSubstantiveMeeting
　　(a)Thereisasignificantdifferencebetweentheclaimsandtheargumentssupportingthoseclaims.
　　(b)Thereisnoprovisionestablishingprecisedeadlinesforthepresentationofevidence.
　　IIIPanel’sRighttoSeekInformation
　　(ⅰ)AGrantofDiscretionaryAuthority
　　(ⅱ)TheAdmissibilityofNon-requestedInformation
　　(ⅲ)SummaryandConclusions
　　IVAdverseInferencesfromParty’sRefusaltoProvideInformationRequested
　　(ⅰ)TheAuthorityofaPaneltoRequestInformationfromaPartytotheDispute
　　(ⅱ)TheDutyofaMembertoComplywiththeRequestofaPaneltoProvideInformation
　　(ⅲ)TheDrawingofAdverseInferencesfromtheRefusalofaPartytoProvideInformationRequestedbythePanel
　　VConcludingRemarks
　　
　　IBurdenofProofundertheWTOJurisprudence
　　Generally,thequestionofwhetheramemberactedinaccordancewiththeagreementhingesfrequentlyonwhetherandtowhatextentthatmembermustdemonstratecomplianceorthecomplaintmustdemonstratealackofcompliance.Itisdemonstratedthattheburdenofproofisaproceduralconceptwhichspeakstothefairandorderlymanagementanddispositionofadispute.Thisistheissueof“theultimateburdenofproofforestablishingaclaimoradefence”.Inthisrespect,thePanelReportonUS-CopyrightAct(DS160)states,“[w]hileadutyrestsonallpartiestoproduceevidenceandtocooperateinpresentingevidencetothePanel,thisisanissuethathastobedistinguishedfromthequestionofwhobearstheultimateburdenofproofforestablishingaclaimoradefence”.1
　　(i)GeneralRulesWellEstablishedinViolationComplaints
　　Art.3.8oftheDSUprovidesthatincaseswherethereisaninfringementoftheobligationsassumedunderacoveredagreement--thatis,incaseswhereaviolationisestablished--thereisapresumptionofnullificationorimpairment.However,theissueofburdenofproofhereisnotwhathappensafteraviolationisestablished;theissueiswhichpartymustfirstshowthatthereis,orisnot,aviolation.Inthisrespect,anumberofGATT1947panelreportscontainlanguagesupportingthepropositionthattheburdenofestablishingaviolationunderArticleXXIII:1(a)oftheGATT1947wasonthecomplainingparty,i.e.,itwasforthecomplainingpartytopresentaprimafaciecaseofviolationbeforeapanel.ThisruleistakenonbytheDSB.
　　Withregardtotheissueofburdenofproof,theAppellateBodyinUS-ShirtsandBlouses(DS33)rulesthat:“Inaddressingthisissue,wefinditdifficult,indeed,toseehowanysystemofjudicialsettlementcouldworkifitincorporatedthepropositionthatthemereassertionofaclaimmightamounttoproof.Itis,thus,hardlysurprisingthatvariousinternationaltribunals,includingtheInternationalCourtofJustice,havegenerallyandconsistentlyacceptedandappliedtherulethatthepartywhoassertsafact,whethertheclaimantortherespondent,isresponsibleforprovidingproofthereof.Also,itisagenerally-acceptedcanonofevidenceincivillaw,commonlawand,infact,mostjurisdictions,thattheburdenofproofrestsupontheparty,whethercomplainingordefending,whoassertstheaffirmativeofaparticularclaimordefence.Ifthatpartyadducesevidencesufficienttoraiseapresumptionthatwhatisclaimedistrue,theburdenthenshiftstotheotherparty,whowillfailunlessitadducessufficientevidencetorebutthepresumption.”2Andthisrulingisdemonstratedtobewellestablishedinsubsequentcasesasageneralruleconcerningburdenofproof.
　　Forexample,inArgentina-Leather(DS155),thePanelstates:“Therelevantrulesconcerningburdenofproof,whilenotexpresslyprovidedforintheDSU,arewellestablishedinWTOjurisprudence.ThegeneralruleissetoutintheAppellateBodyreportonUnitedStates-MeasureAffectingImportsofWovenWoolShirtsandBlouses,whereinitisstatedthat:‘Itisagenerally-acceptedcanonofevidenceincivillaw,commonlawand,infact,mostjurisdictions,thattheburdenofproofrestsupontheparty,whethercomplainingordefending,whoassertstheaffirmativeofaparticularclaimordefence.Ifthatpartyadducesevidencesufficienttoraiseapresumptionthatwhatisclaimedistrue,theburdenthenshiftstotheotherparty,whowillfailunlessitadducessufficientevidencetorebutthepresumption’.”3
　　AndinUS-CottonYarn(DS192),thePanelrulesinpertinentpart:“TheAppellateBodyandsubsequentpanelsendorsedthisprinciplethatacomplainantbearstheburdenofproof.Forexample,theAppellateBody,inEC-Hormones,statesasfollows:‘…Theinitialburdenliesonthecomplainingparty,whichmustestablishaprimafaciecaseofinconsistencywithaparticularprovisionoftheSPSAgreementonthepartofthedefendingparty,ormoreprecisely,ofitsSPSmeasureormeasurescomplainedabout.Whenthatprimafaciecaseismade,theburdenofproofmovestothedefendingparty,whichmustinturncounterorrefutetheclaimedinconsistency.ThisseemsstraightforwardenoughandisinconformitywithourrulinginUnitedStates-ShirtsandBlouses,whichthePanelinvokesandwhichembodiesaruleapplicableinanyadversarialproceedings.’”4
　　Asawhole,ontheonehand,asruledbythePanelinArgentina-CeramicFloorTiles(DS189),“[w]erecallthattheburdenofproofinWTOdisputesettlementproceedingsrestswiththepartythatassertstheaffirmativeofaparticularclaimordefence.ItimpliesthatthecomplainingpartywillberequiredtomakeaprimafaciecaseofviolationoftherelevantprovisionsoftheWTOAgreement,whichisforthedefendant…torefute.Inthisregard,theAppellateBodyhasstatedthat‘...aprimafaciecaseisonewhich,intheabsenceofeffectiverefutationbythedefendingparty,requiresapanel,asamatteroflaw,toruleinfavourofthecomplainingpartypresentingtheprimafaciecase’…”;5ontheotherhand,asnotedinthePanelReportonUS-CopyrightAct(DS160),“[t]hesamerulesapplywheretheexistenceofaspecificfactisalleged.Wenotethatapartywhoassertsafact,whethertheclaimantortherespondent,isresponsibleforprovidingproofthereof.Itisforthepartyallegingthefacttoproveitsexistence.Itisth

[1] [2]  下一页