中国原材料出口措施案:争论焦点与败诉因由剖析及反思
DOI:
CSTR:
作者:
作者单位:

南京财经大学国际经济法研究所,江苏 南京 210046

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:


China-Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials:Dispute Focuses and Losing Causes
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    “中国原材料出口措施案”是继“中美轮胎特保案”败诉后的又一个中方败诉案。中国被指控对9种原材料实施出口限制措施违反《中国“入世”议定书》和GATT等相关义务,而中国则以实施出口限制措施是为了保护人类及动植物的生命或健康,保护环境和自然资源为由援引GATT 第20(b)和(g)条作为抗辩依据。令人遗憾的是,专家组对本案相关条文均采用了刻板与严苛的解释,裁决结果对中国十分不利。然而,中国举证不足和中国“入世”法律文件及国内相关立法与政策存在的诸多问题,值得我们总结和反思,只有这样,才能有效应对未来的WTO诉讼。

    Abstract:

    “China-Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials Case”is another China’s lostcase following the losing of“China and US Tyres Case.”China is charged for violating relevant obligations ofChina’s Accession Protocol and the GATT by imposing export restrictions on nine kinds of raw materials. WhileChina invokes Article XX (b) and (g) of the GATT 1994 for reasons that export restrictions imposed on the rawmaterials is for the purpose of protecting human, animal or plant life or health; or protecting environment andexhaustible natural resources. It’s a pity that the decision of this case is of no benefit to China because the paneluses mechanical and strict interpretations in relevant articles. However, China lacks proof and its legal documentsand domestic relevant legislations and policies have many problems which need to be summed up and counterconsidered.In that case, China can effectively respond to the future litigation under the WTO.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

沈木珠.中国原材料出口措施案:争论焦点与败诉因由剖析及反思[J].国际商务研究,2013,(1):47-62

复制
分享
相关视频

文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2017-07-06
  • 出版日期:
文章二维码
郑重声明
关闭