本文選題：航權(quán) + 航權(quán)開放　； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：在《中國-東盟航空運(yùn)輸協(xié)議》(以下簡稱《協(xié)議》)簽訂之初,本文著眼于中國與東盟間的航權(quán)開放,對(duì)中國-東盟航權(quán)開放的模式、《協(xié)議》中的“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”條款以及航權(quán)開放背景下的競爭法律問題進(jìn)行了研究。 本文共三萬余字,主要包括以下五個(gè)部分: 第一部分簡要論述了航權(quán)與航權(quán)開放的基本知識(shí),以此作為研究中國-東盟航權(quán)開放法律問題的前提與基礎(chǔ)。GATS《航空運(yùn)輸服務(wù)附件》以及ICAO《國際航空運(yùn)輸管理手冊》曾經(jīng)對(duì)航權(quán)作出了界定,但都有一些瑕疵。航權(quán)的主權(quán)屬性與主體往往是容易引起歧義的問題,因此有必要在定義中加以體現(xiàn)。故本文結(jié)合上述兩個(gè)文件,對(duì)航權(quán)的定義作出了自己的總結(jié)。隨后論述了航權(quán)的種類以及航權(quán)行使的內(nèi)容。此外,還闡釋了航權(quán)開放的含義,并對(duì)航空法歷史上航權(quán)開放法律模式的發(fā)展演變進(jìn)行了概括。 第二部分對(duì)《協(xié)議》所采用的法律模式進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)的分析�！伴_放天空模式”主要是美國“開放天空協(xié)議”所代表的法律模式。通過對(duì)《協(xié)議》與美國“開放天空協(xié)議”進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的對(duì)比,總結(jié)出如下結(jié)論:《協(xié)議》主要借鑒了美國“開放天空協(xié)議”,并且二者的目的均在于航空服務(wù)的自由化,只有在運(yùn)價(jià)等極少數(shù)方面還未達(dá)到美國“開放天空協(xié)議”的那種開放程度。因此,中國-東盟航權(quán)開放的模式是發(fā)展中國家在借鑒美國“開放天空協(xié)議”之先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合自身的要求而發(fā)展出來的“開放天空模式”。 第三部分深入分析了中國-東盟航權(quán)開放中的“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”條款。該條款一般表現(xiàn)在航空運(yùn)輸協(xié)議的授權(quán)以及撤銷、限制和中止授權(quán)的規(guī)定中,即以是否符合“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”為條件,決定是否授予其它締約國指定航空企業(yè)在本國開放航線上的經(jīng)營權(quán),或撤銷、限制或中止這種授權(quán)。此外,還有的航空運(yùn)輸協(xié)議規(guī)定了判斷“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。《協(xié)議》也保留了這個(gè)條款,同時(shí)有一些發(fā)展變化——若授權(quán)國同意并且指定國是東盟成員國時(shí),該國可以在一定條件下指定其它一個(gè)或幾個(gè)東盟成員國實(shí)質(zhì)所有并有效控制的航空企業(yè),也就是把“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”的主體范圍從成員國放寬到了整個(gè)東盟,這與東盟建立“單一航空市場”的目標(biāo)是一致的。但是,協(xié)議沒有規(guī)定“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”之標(biāo)準(zhǔn),可能給實(shí)踐帶來不便。最后,面對(duì)該條款的存廢之爭,本文認(rèn)為應(yīng)該保留該條款,但可以放寬實(shí)質(zhì)所有并有效控制的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),并將其納入到《協(xié)議》中。其中,我國可以把“控股”作為實(shí)質(zhì)所有與有效控制的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),既允許我國公民對(duì)我國航空企業(yè)絕對(duì)控股,又允許相對(duì)控股。 第四部分主要論述了中國-東盟航權(quán)開放的競爭法律問題。本部分首先分析了中國-東盟航權(quán)開放背景下注意規(guī)制反競爭行為的必要性。隨后歸納了在國際航空運(yùn)輸服務(wù)中主要的不正當(dāng)競爭行為,包括國家的不正當(dāng)競爭行為和航空企業(yè)的不正當(dāng)競爭行為。前者由國際層面的法律調(diào)整,后者則主要由各國國內(nèi)競爭法律或政策調(diào)整,并且調(diào)整過程中會(huì)出現(xiàn)競爭法沖突的問題。還分析了《協(xié)議》關(guān)于反競爭行為的規(guī)定。最后,針對(duì)競爭法律和政策沖突,筆者建議可以借鑒《美-歐開放天空協(xié)議》附件二的先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn),建立競爭法的合作機(jī)制。 第五部分則綜合地概括了全文得出的主要結(jié)論。 縱觀全文,本文主要的創(chuàng)新之處在于:第一,系統(tǒng)地評(píng)述了《協(xié)議》與美國開放天空協(xié)議中與航權(quán)開放相關(guān)的條款,從而對(duì)中國-東盟航權(quán)開放的法律模式進(jìn)行了總結(jié)。第二,結(jié)合東盟“單一航空市場計(jì)劃”的相關(guān)法律文件,對(duì)《協(xié)議》中的“實(shí)質(zhì)所有權(quán)與有效控制”條款之特征、進(jìn)步及不足進(jìn)行了深入的分析,并對(duì)其判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的制定提出了建議。第三,在了解中國與東盟各國競爭法概況的基礎(chǔ)上,分析了航空服務(wù)貿(mào)易將涉及的競爭法沖突,建議借鑒《美-歐開放天空協(xié)議》,在《協(xié)議》中納入競爭法律與政策的合作機(jī)制。
[Abstract]:At the beginning of the signing of the China ASEAN air transport agreement (hereinafter referred to as < hereinafter referred to as < agreement >), this article focuses on the opening of the air rights between China and ASEAN, the open mode of China ASEAN air rights, the "substantive ownership and effective control" clause in the agreement, and the competition legal issues under the open air rights.
This article has a total of 30000 words, mainly including the following five parts:
The first part briefly discusses the basic knowledge of the opening of air rights and navigation rights. As a prerequisite and basis for the study of the open law of China ASEAN air rights, the.GATS< air transport service appendix and the ICAO< international air transport management manual have defined the navigation rights, but there are some defects. It is a problem that easily causes ambiguity, so it is necessary to embody it in the definition. Therefore, this paper makes a summary of the definition of navigation right with the above two documents. Then it discusses the types of navigation rights and the content of the exercise of air rights. In addition, it also explains the meaning of the opening of air rights and the open legal model of aviation rights in the history of aviation law. The development and evolution are summarized.
The second part makes a systematic analysis of the legal pattern adopted by the "open sky model", which is mainly the legal model of the "open sky agreement" in the United States. Through a detailed comparison between the "open sky agreement" and the "open sky agreement" of the United States, the following conclusions are summarized: < protocol > mainly draws lessons from the "open sky" in the United States. The purpose of the agreement, and the two is to liberate aviation services, only has not reached the openness of the "open sky agreement" of the United States only in a few aspects such as freight rates. Therefore, the opening mode of China ASEAN air rights is based on the advanced experience of the developing countries to learn from the "open sky air agreement" of the United States. The "open sky mode" developed from the requirements of the body.
The third part analyzes the terms of "substantive ownership and effective control" in the opening of China ASEAN air rights. This clause is generally manifested in the authorization of the air transport agreement, the revocation, limitation and suspension of the authorization, that is, whether it is conformed to the "substantive ownership and effective control", and decides whether or not the other Contracting States are granted. To determine the right of an airline to operate on its own open route, or to revoke, limit, or suspend such authorization. In addition, the air transport agreement stipulates the criteria for judging "substantial ownership and effective control". The agreement has also retained this clause, and there are some changes in development - if the authorized country agrees and the designated country is a member of ASEAN In a country, the country can specify, under certain conditions, an aviation enterprise that is essentially all and effectively controlled by one or several ASEAN members, which is to broaden the scope of "substantive ownership and effective control" from its member states to the whole ASEAN, which is consistent with the goal of establishing a "single aviation market" by ASEAN. There is no standard of "substantive ownership and effective control", which may bring inconvenience to practice. In the end, in the face of the dispute over the existence and abolition of the clause, this article holds that the clause should be retained, but the standard of substantial and effective control can be relaxed and incorporated into the < agreement >. The standard of effective control not only allows Chinese citizens to hold absolute control of China's aviation enterprises, but also allows relative holding.
The fourth part mainly discusses the competition law of the opening of China ASEAN air rights. This part first analyzes the necessity of regulating anti competitive behavior under the opening of China ASEAN air rights, and then sums up the main unfair competition behavior in the international air transport service, including the unfair competition behavior of the country and the aviation enterprise. The former is regulated by the law at the international level, the latter is mainly adjusted by the domestic competition laws and policies, and the conflict of competition law will appear in the process of adjustment. The provisions of the agreement on anti competitive behavior are also analyzed. Finally, the author suggests that the law and policy conflict can be used for reference to the United States and Europe. The advanced experience of annex two of open sky protocol, and the establishment of a cooperation mechanism for competition law.
The fifth part generalizes the main conclusions drawn from the full text.
In view of the full text, the main innovations of this paper are as follows: first, the article systematically reviews the terms related to the opening of the air rights in the agreement between the agreement and the open sky agreement in the United States, and summarizes the legal model of the opening of China ASEAN air rights. Second, combining the relevant legal documents of the ASEAN "single aviation market plan", the "agreement >" On the basis of the general situation of the competition law of China and ASEAN countries, the article analyses the conflict of competition law that will be involved in the aviation service trade, and proposes to draw on the "US Europe open sky agreement >", on the basis of the general situation of the competition law of China and ASEAN countries. Third The cooperation mechanism of competition law and policy should be included in the agreement.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D993.4;F562

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉小龍;;東盟國家發(fā)展旅游業(yè)的政策措施[J];亞非縱橫;1996年02期

2 周勁松;東盟國家有關(guān)口腔護(hù)理用品的管理法規(guī)[J];牙膏工業(yè);2001年03期

3 本刊編輯部;;富裕東盟 富裕廣西[J];今日南國;2007年11期

4 于如;;東盟國家的警鈴[J];世界知識(shí);1979年04期

5 中內(nèi)恒夫;汪慕恒;;東盟國家的貿(mào)易不平衡問題[J];南洋資料譯叢;1983年01期

6 納谷誠二;趙文騮;;東盟國家的投資氣侯[J];南洋資料譯叢;1986年01期

7 林伍s，

本文編號(hào)：2030464