發(fā)布時間：2018-03-08 11:21

  本文選題：市場擾亂　切入點：迅速增加　出處：《華東政法大學》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：中美輪胎特保案，，是針對中國入世議定書第16條項下所規(guī)定的特殊保障措施的第一起案件，雖然關于特殊保障措施的理論研究已經有很多前輩多有論述，但是針對這第一起發(fā)生的實際案件，針對有些條文的規(guī)定在具體爭議解決中的解釋問題，筆者認為還是非常有必要來分析一下專家組以及上訴機構的意見，這樣才能夠更好的指導我們今后在爭議解決中如何把握專家組以及上訴機構針對某些條文的解釋傾向，更好地在現有條文規(guī)定的情況下最大限度的保護自己的合法權益。本文主要是以上訴機構的報告為出發(fā)點，文章重心是分析在上訴機構報告中是如何具體認定“市場擾亂”的認定標準的，而不是從純理論的角度去分析“市場擾亂”的認定標準，而且本文的論述重點主要局限于針對存在“市場擾亂”啟動特殊保障措施適用時的“市場擾亂”的認定標準，而對重大貿易轉移所啟動的特殊保障措施的適用不作討論。本文除去引言和結語，全文共分五章。 第一章介紹特殊保障措施的概念以及特殊保障措施與一般保障措施及GATT1994第19條之間的關系。 第二章介紹了市場擾亂這一概念的產生和發(fā)展，通過論述我們可以發(fā)現不論該概念以何種形式出現，其本質還是為了保護本國的國內產業(yè)，這也為我們更好的理解特殊保障措施的提出，提供了一個大的背景。 第三章論述了針對議定書第16條的解釋問題，介紹了在實際案件中，專家組及上訴機構是如何確定某一條文的具體內涵的。 第四章從上訴機構的報告中總結概括出，在實際案件中市場擾亂的認定標準是如何的，結合中美輪胎特保案的實際案情，分別總結概括出了，進口迅速增加的認定，因果關系的認定。而在針對因果關系的認定中又確立了，什么是重要原因的認定，進口迅速增加與實質損害之間的聯系的認定。 第五章是通過實際分析專家組以及上訴機構的報告，我們能夠發(fā)現專家組以及上訴機構在實際案件中是傾向于如何具體解釋抽象的條文的，為我們今后更好的應訴，更好的利用現有的條文，最大限度的保護自己的合法權益提供了一些實際的指導意見。
[Abstract]:The China-US tire special protection case is the first case against the special safeguard measures stipulated under Article 16 of the Protocol on China's accession to the WTO, although the theoretical study on special safeguard measures has already been discussed by many previous generations. However, in view of this first actual case and the interpretation of some provisions in the specific dispute settlement, the author thinks that it is still very necessary to analyze the opinions of the Panel of experts and the Appellate body. Only in this way can we better guide us in how to grasp the interpretation tendency of the Panel of experts and the appellate bodies on certain articles in the future in dispute settlement. Better to protect their legitimate rights and interests to the maximum extent under the existing provisions. This article is mainly based on the report of the Appellate body as the starting point. The focus of the article is to analyze how to identify the criterion of "market disturbance" in the report of appellate body, but not to analyze the criterion of "market disturbance" from the point of view of pure theory. Moreover, the emphasis of this paper is mainly limited to the identification standard of "market disturbance" when the special safeguard measures are applicable. However, the application of special safeguard measures initiated by major trade transfer is not discussed. Apart from the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into five chapters. The first chapter introduces the concept of special safeguard measures and the relationship between special safeguard measures and general safeguard measures and article 19 of GATT1994. The second chapter introduces the emergence and development of the concept of market disruption. By discussing the concept, we can find that the essence of the concept, no matter what form it takes, is to protect the domestic industry of the country. This also provides a big background for us to better understand the proposal of special safeguard measures. The third chapter discusses the interpretation of Article 16 of the Protocol and introduces how the Panel of experts and the Appellate body determine the specific connotation of a certain article in practical cases. Chapter 4th summarizes from the report of the Appellate body, what is the standard for determining market disruption in actual cases? combined with the actual circumstances of the China-US tire special protection case, it sums up separately the determination that imports are increasing rapidly. In the identification of causality, the identification of what is the important cause, the relationship between the rapid increase of imports and the substantial damage. Chapter 5th is based on a practical analysis of the reports of expert groups and appellate bodies, and we can see how the panels and appellate bodies tend to interpret abstract provisions in actual cases, so that we can better respond to complaints in the future. Better use of existing provisions, maximum protection of their legitimate rights and interests to provide some practical guidance.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D996.1

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前6條

1 陳衛(wèi)東;評美國ITC對中國產品“市場擾亂”的認定標準[J];法學評論;2004年04期

2 李娟;;試論特定產品過渡性保障機制——對中國入世談判不同草案之評析[J];當代法學;2007年02期

3 吳淑娟;宋海冰;;美國貿易法中“市場擾亂”的認定標準研究[J];山東紡織經濟;2006年01期

4 徐文超;特定產品過渡性保障機制的效應及我國的對策[J];現代法學;2003年02期

5 盧群星;選擇性保障措施對華適用的法律分析[J];浙江學刊;2003年02期

6 王蓉;;中國過渡期內特殊保障措施與WTO《保障措施協定》之比較研究[J];中山大學學報論叢;2007年11期

相關碩士學位論文 前5條

1 吳榮榮;中國入世議定書之特定產品過渡性保障機制研究[D];外交學院;2006年

2 鄭曉飛;特定產品過渡性保障機制的法律分析[D];山西大學;2006年

3 程潮;特定產品過渡性保障機制研究[D];廈門大學;2006年

4 郭婉瑩;針對中國特定產品過渡性保障機制的分析及對策[D];吉林大學;2010年

5 韓慶紅;特定產品過渡性保障機制的法律問題研究[D];西南政法大學;2010年

本文編號：1583680