本文選題：目的解釋 + WTO的目的和宗旨　； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：自WTO成立以來,爭(zhēng)端解決過程中的法律解釋問題一直是學(xué)術(shù)界討論的熱點(diǎn)問題,幾乎每個(gè)經(jīng)過專家組和上訴機(jī)構(gòu)解釋的案例都成為學(xué)理研究的典型樣本,盡管爭(zhēng)端案件具體案情涉及的領(lǐng)域不同,但解釋方法卻有高度的一致性,即大多數(shù)案件專家組和上訴機(jī)構(gòu)都是堅(jiān)持文本主義的立場(chǎng),對(duì)文義解釋方法的推崇表現(xiàn)的淋漓盡致。文義解釋方法雖然能夠在最大限度內(nèi)約束法官的自由裁量權(quán),但其缺陷和不足也不容忽視,文義解釋的僵化可能使得解釋結(jié)果偏離條約制定的目的,條約的實(shí)質(zhì)正義得不到實(shí)現(xiàn)。目的解釋方法立足于條約的目的,具有一定的靈活性,條約目的解釋的靈活性恰恰可以彌補(bǔ)條約文義解釋的僵化所帶來的不足,有助于實(shí)現(xiàn)條約的實(shí)質(zhì)正義。 WTO爭(zhēng)端解決中更需要目的解釋方法,因?yàn)閃TO法律體系具有特殊性,它的制定主體眾多,雖然不是每個(gè)成員都參與了WTO各條約的制定,較之國(guó)內(nèi)法律,WTO條約的制定主體依然稱得上是多數(shù)。眾多的當(dāng)事國(guó)對(duì)于條約制定前期談判階段不能達(dá)成一致,但又必須作出規(guī)定的事項(xiàng),用模糊、不確定的語言來表達(dá),文義解釋拘泥于字而含義,不能清楚地做出解釋。此外條約的穩(wěn)定性與社會(huì)動(dòng)態(tài)發(fā)展、語義動(dòng)態(tài)變化的矛盾,也使得爭(zhēng)端解決中目的解釋方法變得非常必要。 WTO的目的和宗旨或明顯或隱秘的存在于WTO條約體系中,了解WTO的目的和宗旨是正確適用目的解釋方法解決WTO爭(zhēng)端的前提；目的解釋方法可否作為一種獨(dú)立的解釋方法在爭(zhēng)端解決中適用?這是研究WTO目的解釋所必須解決的問題；專家組和上訴機(jī)構(gòu)在眾多的案例中對(duì)文義解釋方法的偏愛是常態(tài)的,但是在具體的案件中也有發(fā)生變化的情況,通過案例分析專家組和上訴結(jié)構(gòu)對(duì)目的解釋態(tài)度的變化也是研究WTO目的解釋方法適用的內(nèi)容；任何一種解釋方法都不是完美的,目的解釋方法也有其局限性。認(rèn)識(shí)它的局限性,并且采取相應(yīng)的措施彌補(bǔ)它的局限性,才能使目的解釋方法發(fā)揮應(yīng)有的作用。
[Abstract]:Since the establishment of WTO, the issue of legal interpretation in the process of dispute settlement has been a hot issue in academic circles. Almost every case explained by panel of experts and appellate bodies has become a typical sample of theoretical research. Although the specific cases of dispute cases involve different fields, there is a high degree of consistency in interpretation methods, that is, most of the case panels and appellate bodies adhere to textualism and show incisively and vividly the reverence for the interpretation methods of text and meaning. Although the method of literal interpretation can restrict the judge's discretion to the maximum extent, its defects and shortcomings should not be ignored. The fossilization of the interpretation of text and meaning may cause the result of interpretation to deviate from the purpose of treaty making. The essential justice of the treaty cannot be realized. The method of objective interpretation is based on the purpose of the treaty and has certain flexibility. The flexibility of the interpretation of the purpose of the treaty can make up for the deficiency brought by the ossification of the interpretation of the meaning of the treaty and is helpful to the realization of the substantive justice of the treaty. In the WTO dispute settlement, the purpose interpretation method is needed more, because the WTO legal system has the particularity, its formulation body is numerous, although not every member participated in the WTO each treaty formulation, Compared with domestic laws, the subject of WTO treaty is still the majority. Many parties can not reach agreement on the early negotiation stage of treaty making, but they must also make a stipulation, express it in vague and uncertain language, the meaning interpretation is bound by the word and the meaning, can't make the explanation clearly. In addition, the contradiction between the stability of the treaty and the development of society and the change of semantics makes it necessary to interpret the purpose in dispute settlement. The object and purpose of WTO or obviously or secretly exist in the treaty system of WTO. Understanding the object and purpose of WTO is the premise of applying the method of purpose interpretation to settle the dispute of WTO. Can the method of interpretation be used as an independent method of interpretation in dispute settlement? This is a problem that must be addressed in studying the interpretation of the purpose of WTO; the preference of expert groups and appellate bodies for textual interpretation in many cases is normal, but in specific cases there are situations where changes have taken place. The change of the attitude towards the purpose interpretation through case analysis expert group and appeal structure is also the content of the study on the purpose interpretation method of WTO, and any interpretation method is not perfect, and the purpose interpretation method also has its limitations. Only by recognizing its limitations and taking corresponding measures to make up for its limitations can the purpose explanation method play its due role.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1;D993.8

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳金釗;目的解釋方法及其意義[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年05期

2 房東;;對(duì)“文本”的揚(yáng)棄:WTO條約解釋方法的一種修正——以服務(wù)貿(mào)易具體承諾表的解釋為分析起點(diǎn)[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2011年03期

3 張燕玲,白幫武;簡(jiǎn)論目的解釋及其應(yīng)用[J];東岳論叢;2005年03期

4 蔣惠嶺;目的解釋法的理論及適用(上)[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年05期

5 蔣惠嶺;目的解釋法的理論及適用(下)[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年08期

6 孫煈;;WTO條約解釋中出現(xiàn)的問題——以法庭之友意見書為例[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(下旬刊);2010年02期

7 汪仁可;劉海渤;;論目的解釋的主觀性和客觀性[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年06期

8 李濱;;世貿(mào)組織爭(zhēng)端解決實(shí)踐中的條約目的解釋[J];世界貿(mào)易組織動(dòng)態(tài)與研究;2010年06期

9 龍世發(fā);;適用與限制:法律解釋中的目的解釋方法[J];政法學(xué)刊;2009年02期

10 蘇力;解釋的難題:對(duì)幾種法律文本解釋方法的追問[J];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué);1997年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 唐青陽;規(guī)則的解釋與解釋的規(guī)則[D];西南政法大學(xué);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 何亞婷;世貿(mào)組織爭(zhēng)端解決中的司法能動(dòng)主義研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2011年

2 王建榮;論法律推理與法律解釋[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年

3 陳靈海;解釋學(xué)與法律解釋[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2001年

4 周繼紅;從法律解釋的內(nèi)涵論我國(guó)法律解釋體制[D];安徽大學(xué);2005年

5 裴煜;論WTO爭(zhēng)端解決中的法律解釋[D];武漢大學(xué);2005年

6 張鄧蓉;論目的解釋[D];山東大學(xué);2006年

7 李寶軍;法律解釋的應(yīng)用分析[D];山東大學(xué);2006年

8 王大偉;目的解釋方法及其適用研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：1865741