本文選題：市場(chǎng)擾亂　切入點(diǎn)：迅速增加　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：中美輪胎特保案，，是針對(duì)中國入世議定書第16條項(xiàng)下所規(guī)定的特殊保障措施的第一起案件，雖然關(guān)于特殊保障措施的理論研究已經(jīng)有很多前輩多有論述，但是針對(duì)這第一起發(fā)生的實(shí)際案件，針對(duì)有些條文的規(guī)定在具體爭(zhēng)議解決中的解釋問題，筆者認(rèn)為還是非常有必要來分析一下專家組以及上訴機(jī)構(gòu)的意見，這樣才能夠更好的指導(dǎo)我們今后在爭(zhēng)議解決中如何把握專家組以及上訴機(jī)構(gòu)針對(duì)某些條文的解釋傾向，更好地在現(xiàn)有條文規(guī)定的情況下最大限度的保護(hù)自己的合法權(quán)益。本文主要是以上訴機(jī)構(gòu)的報(bào)告為出發(fā)點(diǎn)，文章重心是分析在上訴機(jī)構(gòu)報(bào)告中是如何具體認(rèn)定“市場(chǎng)擾亂”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的，而不是從純理論的角度去分析“市場(chǎng)擾亂”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，而且本文的論述重點(diǎn)主要局限于針對(duì)存在“市場(chǎng)擾亂”啟動(dòng)特殊保障措施適用時(shí)的“市場(chǎng)擾亂”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，而對(duì)重大貿(mào)易轉(zhuǎn)移所啟動(dòng)的特殊保障措施的適用不作討論。本文除去引言和結(jié)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(guān)系。 第二章介紹了市場(chǎng)擾亂這一概念的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展，通過論述我們可以發(fā)現(xiàn)不論該概念以何種形式出現(xiàn)，其本質(zhì)還是為了保護(hù)本國的國內(nèi)產(chǎn)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(gè)大的背景。 第三章論述了針對(duì)議定書第16條的解釋問題，介紹了在實(shí)際案件中，專家組及上訴機(jī)構(gòu)是如何確定某一條文的具體內(nèi)涵的。 第四章從上訴機(jī)構(gòu)的報(bào)告中總結(jié)概括出，在實(shí)際案件中市場(chǎng)擾亂的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是如何的，結(jié)合中美輪胎特保案的實(shí)際案情，分別總結(jié)概括出了，進(jìn)口迅速增加的認(rèn)定，因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定。而在針對(duì)因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定中又確立了，什么是重要原因的認(rèn)定，進(jìn)口迅速增加與實(shí)質(zhì)損害之間的聯(lián)系的認(rèn)定。 第五章是通過實(shí)際分析專家組以及上訴機(jī)構(gòu)的報(bào)告，我們能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)專家組以及上訴機(jī)構(gòu)在實(shí)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(yīng)訴，更好的利用現(xiàn)有的條文，最大限度的保護(hù)自己的合法權(quán)益提供了一些實(shí)際的指導(dǎo)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(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 陳衛(wèi)東;評(píng)美國ITC對(duì)中國產(chǎn)品“市場(chǎng)擾亂”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2004年04期

2 李娟;;試論特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制——對(duì)中國入世談判不同草案之評(píng)析[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年02期

3 吳淑娟;宋海冰;;美國貿(mào)易法中“市場(chǎng)擾亂”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[J];山東紡織經(jīng)濟(jì);2006年01期

4 徐文超;特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制的效應(yīng)及我國的對(duì)策[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2003年02期

5 盧群星;選擇性保障措施對(duì)華適用的法律分析[J];浙江學(xué)刊;2003年02期

6 王蓉;;中國過渡期內(nèi)特殊保障措施與WTO《保障措施協(xié)定》之比較研究[J];中山大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)論叢;2007年11期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 吳榮榮;中國入世議定書之特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制研究[D];外交學(xué)院;2006年

2 鄭曉飛;特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制的法律分析[D];山西大學(xué);2006年

3 程潮;特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制研究[D];廈門大學(xué);2006年

4 郭婉瑩;針對(duì)中國特定產(chǎn)品過渡性保障機(jī)制的分析及對(duì)策[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

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

本文編號(hào)：1583680