WTO争端解决机制执行阶段之仲裁程序研究
摘要
WTO争端解决机制因其仲裁与诉讼相结合的纠纷解决模式而倍受关注。仲裁程序虽不是其中的主流,但其意义却不容忽视,尤其是执行阶段仲裁更是对专家组和上诉机构报告的有效执行发挥着重要的作用。
本文从地位、特征、法律依据、适用状况、实际案例、程序问题以及改革完善等多个角度对执行阶段仲裁进行了系统的分析。具体而言:本文在第一部分简要介绍了相关学术研究背景的基础上,第二部分首先给出了关于执行仲裁的地位、作用以及适用条件的总体认识,随后又对DSU中调整执行仲裁的法律条文进行了解读,进而阐释和分析了其中的重点问题,紧接着又全面比较了执行仲裁与WTO中的自愿仲裁和一般国际商事仲裁的异同点,突出了执行仲裁作为WTO体制下辅助性仲裁的特征;第三部分主要研究了启动执行仲裁的实践情况,包括对适用21.3(c)和22.6的仲裁案例进行列举,陈述了相关案件信息和裁决结果并对同类案件的实践规律进行了归纳总结,另外还分析了中国利用执行仲裁的现状和前景;第四部分介绍了实践中涉及到的执行仲裁程序问题,通过具体案例的阐释,使读者对执行仲裁中仲裁权限,仲裁员选任,第三方参与,举证规则和裁决效力等问题有了较为直观的了解;最后一部分为执行仲裁程序的完善,即结合前文的分析首先提出该程序的缺陷和不足,然后逐一提出相应的完善对策。
本文在写作中基本上遵循了整体与部分,一般与特殊相结合的研究思路,坚持理论联系实际,采用了法条解读与实际案例并重的综合分析方法,对执行仲裁程序的运作进行了全方位、多层次的透视。本文以执行阶段仲裁作为直接研究对象展开充分论述,在研究学说理论和相关规则的同时纳入了丰富的案例分析,又以表格形式将有关案例整体展现出来并做针对性分析,这种对执行仲裁程序全面、系统、直观、量化的研究方式在国内外相关领域的研究中具有一定的创新性和前沿性。相信本文的研究会对细致把握WTO执行仲裁制度的理论与实践,促进执行阶段仲裁的正确、规范和有效适用等方面具有一定的积极意义。
WTO dispute settlement mechanism has caught much attention as an unique method that combines characters of both lawsuit and arbitration. Although arbitration is not a principal dispute settlement method used in WTO, its significance can’t be neglected. In the execute phase, arbitration has a particular importance to the implementation of DSB decisions.
This article systematically analyzed the different aspects of the execute phase arbitration, including its position, characters, the rules of its application, cases involving arbitration, the governing procedure and the reform measures for improvement. In a more detailed manner, as a basis for further analysis, the first part of this article briefly introduces the relevant information concerning the already effectuated research on the subject; the second part firstly makes a generalization of the execute phase arbitration, then clarifies the applicable rules in DSU, highlights the key issues related to the arbitration in execution phase. Also in the second part, the author compares the execute phase arbitration with other arbitrations provided for by the law of WTO and with the international commercial arbitration, in view of emphasizing its status as an accessory arbitration. The third part introduces the practices in execute phase arbitration by inserting a chart of cases to whom Article 21.3(c) and Article 22.6 apply. By presenting the author’s brief analysis, the aforementioned chart provides much useful information and reveals China’s practice in this field. The fourth part introduces the procedural matters in practice through analyzing some particular cases, including inter alia limitation on arbitral rights, designation of arbitrators, participation of third party, burden of proof. At the end, author’s opinions are given on how to reform the execute phase arbitration with some proposed solutions targeting the defects and shortcomings of arbitration procedure.
The main point of this article is to integrate the interpretation of the arbitration rules into case analysis for purpose of leading a systematic review on the execute phase arbitration. With regard to this subject, interpretation of DSU rules is closely connected with its relevant practice by using useful statistics and charts. The novelty of the study led by this articles resides its comprehensiveness, completeness, limpidity and clearness. The author believes that this article could help to better understand the execute phase arbitration, and its even more exact, regular and effective application.
本文从地位、特征、法律依据、适用状况、实际案例、程序问题以及改革完善等多个角度对执行阶段仲裁进行了系统的分析。具体而言:本文在第一部分简要介绍了相关学术研究背景的基础上,第二部分首先给出了关于执行仲裁的地位、作用以及适用条件的总体认识,随后又对DSU中调整执行仲裁的法律条文进行了解读,进而阐释和分析了其中的重点问题,紧接着又全面比较了执行仲裁与WTO中的自愿仲裁和一般国际商事仲裁的异同点,突出了执行仲裁作为WTO体制下辅助性仲裁的特征;第三部分主要研究了启动执行仲裁的实践情况,包括对适用21.3(c)和22.6的仲裁案例进行列举,陈述了相关案件信息和裁决结果并对同类案件的实践规律进行了归纳总结,另外还分析了中国利用执行仲裁的现状和前景;第四部分介绍了实践中涉及到的执行仲裁程序问题,通过具体案例的阐释,使读者对执行仲裁中仲裁权限,仲裁员选任,第三方参与,举证规则和裁决效力等问题有了较为直观的了解;最后一部分为执行仲裁程序的完善,即结合前文的分析首先提出该程序的缺陷和不足,然后逐一提出相应的完善对策。
本文在写作中基本上遵循了整体与部分,一般与特殊相结合的研究思路,坚持理论联系实际,采用了法条解读与实际案例并重的综合分析方法,对执行仲裁程序的运作进行了全方位、多层次的透视。本文以执行阶段仲裁作为直接研究对象展开充分论述,在研究学说理论和相关规则的同时纳入了丰富的案例分析,又以表格形式将有关案例整体展现出来并做针对性分析,这种对执行仲裁程序全面、系统、直观、量化的研究方式在国内外相关领域的研究中具有一定的创新性和前沿性。相信本文的研究会对细致把握WTO执行仲裁制度的理论与实践,促进执行阶段仲裁的正确、规范和有效适用等方面具有一定的积极意义。
WTO dispute settlement mechanism has caught much attention as an unique method that combines characters of both lawsuit and arbitration. Although arbitration is not a principal dispute settlement method used in WTO, its significance can’t be neglected. In the execute phase, arbitration has a particular importance to the implementation of DSB decisions.
This article systematically analyzed the different aspects of the execute phase arbitration, including its position, characters, the rules of its application, cases involving arbitration, the governing procedure and the reform measures for improvement. In a more detailed manner, as a basis for further analysis, the first part of this article briefly introduces the relevant information concerning the already effectuated research on the subject; the second part firstly makes a generalization of the execute phase arbitration, then clarifies the applicable rules in DSU, highlights the key issues related to the arbitration in execution phase. Also in the second part, the author compares the execute phase arbitration with other arbitrations provided for by the law of WTO and with the international commercial arbitration, in view of emphasizing its status as an accessory arbitration. The third part introduces the practices in execute phase arbitration by inserting a chart of cases to whom Article 21.3(c) and Article 22.6 apply. By presenting the author’s brief analysis, the aforementioned chart provides much useful information and reveals China’s practice in this field. The fourth part introduces the procedural matters in practice through analyzing some particular cases, including inter alia limitation on arbitral rights, designation of arbitrators, participation of third party, burden of proof. At the end, author’s opinions are given on how to reform the execute phase arbitration with some proposed solutions targeting the defects and shortcomings of arbitration procedure.
The main point of this article is to integrate the interpretation of the arbitration rules into case analysis for purpose of leading a systematic review on the execute phase arbitration. With regard to this subject, interpretation of DSU rules is closely connected with its relevant practice by using useful statistics and charts. The novelty of the study led by this articles resides its comprehensiveness, completeness, limpidity and clearness. The author believes that this article could help to better understand the execute phase arbitration, and its even more exact, regular and effective application.
引文
1黄进.仲裁法学.中国政法大学出版社,1999:2~3
2余敏友.WTO争端解决机制概论.上海人民出版社.2001:8~10
3缪剑文,鲍建强.世贸组织中的仲裁机制探析.国际贸易问题.1998,(3):19~25
4彭翔.论WTO中的仲裁机制.西南政法大学硕士论文.2004:71~73 19~20 25~26 7 6 40~41 29
5赵维田等.WTO的司法机制.上海人民出版社,2004:236 243~244 256~257
6 WTO.Canada-Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Products (Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes).WT/DS114/13,18 August 2000:12~13 3 39 13 1
7 WTO.EC-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones).WT/DS26/15, WT/DS48/13,29 May 1998:10 1 14 10
8 WTO.Korea-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverage.WT/DS75/16,WT/DS84/14,4 June 1999:11
9赵维田.世贸组织的法律制度.吉林人民出版社,2000: 465~467
10 Emmanuel Gaillard, John Savage. Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration. Kluwer Law International,1999:9~10
11蔡强.WTO争端解决中仲裁制度研究.武汉大学硕士论文.2005:41
12 WTO.United States-section 110 (5) of US copyright Act (complainant: European communities).WT/DS160,15 January 2001:1
13刘东洲.论世界贸易组织争端解决机制中仲裁制度的运用和完善—比较北美自由贸易区法律与实践.中国政法大学硕士论文.2007:23～24
14 Gaetan Verhoosel. The Use of Investor-State Arbitration under Bilateral Investment Treaties to Seek Relief for Breaches of WTO Law. Journal of International Economic Law. 2003:493~506
15陈安.国际投资争端仲裁—“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究.上海复旦大学出版社,2001:106~109 130
16 Georgios I.Zekos. An Examination of GATT/WTO Arbitration Procedure. Dispute Resolution Journal. 1999,11:73
17 Kara Leitner and Simon Lester. WTO Dispute Settlement 1995-2007—A Statistical Analysis. Journal of International Economic Law. 2008,3(11):179~192
18龚柏华,倪洁颖.中美有关铜版纸征收反倾销和反补贴税WTO磋商案评析.国际商务研究.2007,(6):49~ 53
19赵海峰.中国与国际司法机构关系的演进.法学评论.2008,(6):9~12
20余敏友.WTO争端解决活动—中国表现及其改进建议.法学评论.2008,(4):92~95
21宋洁.中美欧“汽车零部件案”的国际法分析.湖南行政学院学报.2007,(3):89~91
22 WTO.China-Measures Affecting Imports of Automobile Parts.AB-2008-10. WT/DS339/AB/R,WT/DS340/AB/R,WT/DS342/AB/R,15 December 2008:105
23余盛兴.败诉并不可怕—中国汽车零部件案在WTO败诉纪实.WTO经济导刊.2008, 9:92
24杨井鑫.WTO裁决中国在汽车零部件争端中败诉.中国贸易报.2008,7:12
25 WTO.China-Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights.WT/DS362/R,26 January 2009:134
26李晓明.中美知识产权案是美国贸易保护主义的大暴露.WTO经济导刊.2008, (6):71~72
27 WTO.Chile-Price Band System and Safeguard Measures Relating to Certain Agricultural Products.ARB-2002-2/15.WT/DS207/13,17 March 2003:1 8 11
28 WTO.Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry.WT/DS139/12, WT/DS142/12,4 October 2000:16
29 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation,Sale and Distribution of Bananas.WT/DS27/15,7 January 1998:6~7
30 WTO.United States-Measures Relating to Zeroing and Sunset Reviews. WT/DS322/21,11 May 2007:1
31 WTO.Dominican Republic-Measure Affecting the Importation and Internal Sale of Cigarettes.WT/DS302/17,29 August 2005:2
32 WTO.United States-Final Dumping Determination on Softwood Lumber from Canada.WT/DS264/13,13 December 2004:2
33 WTO.United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line pipe from Korea.WT/DS202/17,26 July 2002:2
34 WTO.United States-Anti-Dumping Act of 1916.WT/DS136/11,WT/DS162/14,28 February 2001:2 9~10
35 WTO.Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (Recourse to Arbitration by brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement). WT/DS46/ARB,28 August 2000:3
36 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of bananas(Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU).WT/DS27/ARB,9 April 1999:1 2~3 1 3 4 3
37 WTO.European Communities-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones).WT/DS26/ARB,WT/DS48/ARB,12 July 1999:4 4~5 5~6 1 3
38 WTO.United States-Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 ofthe DSU).WT/DS285/ARB,21 December 2007:78
39 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas (Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU).WT/DS27/ARB/ECU,24 March 2000:36~37
40 WTO.United States-Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. WT/DS234/ARB,31 August 2004:48~49
41 WTO.Canada-Export Credits and Loan Guarantee for Regional Aircraft (Recourse to Arbitration by Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement).WT/DS222/ARB,17 February 2003:32~33 4~5 4
42 WTO.Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft.WT/DS46/ARB,28 August 2000:27 7 3~4 4
43 WTO.Indonesia-Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry.WT/DS54/15, WT/DS55/14,WT/DS59/13,WT/DS64/12,7 December 1998:8 3 8 2 1~2
44 WTO.Australia-Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon.WT/DS18/9,23 February 1999:9 1
45 WTO.Korea-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverage.WT/DS75/16,WT/DS84/14,4 June 1999:8
46赵建文.国际法新论.法律出版社,2000: 608
47 WTO.Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (Arbitration under Article 21(3)(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes). WT/DS8/15,WT/DS10/15,WT/DS11/13,14 February 1997:2 1 1
48朱榄叶.WTO争端解决程序中的证据问题.当代法学.2007,21(1):123~124
49戴维?帕尔米特[美].WTO中的争端解决:实践与程序.罗培新,李春林译.北京大学出版社,2005:240
50 Marco Bronckers, Naboth van den Broek. Financial Compensation in the WTO: Improving the Remedies of WTO Dispute Settlement. Journal of International Economic Law. 2005,3(8):101~126
51朱揽叶.世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析(1995-2002).法律出版社, 2004(下):622~654
52余敏友,席晶.论WTO争端解决机制中的证据规则.法学评论.2003,(5):92
53 WTO.United States-Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sale Corporations”(Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement).WT/DS108/ARB,30 August 2002:2
54 Yuka Fukunaga. Securing compliance through the WTO dispute settlement system: implementation of DSB recommendations. Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,6(9):411~415 419～425
55余丽.WTO执行争端次序问题:双边解决和多边完善.法律适用.2007,(2):45~49
56 Kym Anderson. Peculiarities of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement. WorldTrade Review.2002:126~127
57 Bruce Wilson. Compliance by WTO Members with Adverse WTO Dispute Settlement Rulings. Journal of International Economic Law. 2007,6(10):397~403
58张潇剑.WTO争端解决机制之利弊得失.文章来源于国际经济法网: http://www.intereconomiclaw.com/
59郑小敏.论WTO争端解决机制的执行程序.长沙理工大学学报(社会科学版). 2005, 6(2):41
60 Thomas Cottier. Preparing for Structural Reform in the WTO. Journal of International Economic Law. 2007,9(10): 497~508
61杨宏伟.WTO和举证责任.法制与社会.2007,10:63
62崔盈.WTO争端解决机制缺陷与完善研究.江西财经大学硕士论文.2004:21~22 33~34 23~24
63王波.论世贸组织的仲裁制度及我国仲裁制度的改革.湖北财经高等专科学校学报.2002,4(2):12~14
64张一君.WTO专家小组审理程序中的第三方介入问题.中国人民大学法律硕士论文.文章来源于国际经济法网: http://www.intereconomiclaw.com/
65颜芳.DSU机制视野下的“法庭之友”制度.法制与社会.2009,3(下):143
66纪文华,姜丽勇.WTO争端解决规则与中国的实践.北京大学出版社,2005:114
67余敏友,陈喜峰.WTO争端解决机制的改革谈判和我国的因应策略.国际经济法学刊.2004,10:118
68王贵国.国际贸易法.北京大学出版社,2004:406
69周元梅.WTO专家组工作程序制度的不足与完善.法制与社会.2007,(1):130
70张力,郭敏华.WTO争端解决机制的缺陷与完善.商业时代?理论.2005,(5):59 59~60
71 CL Lim. Law & Diplomacy in World Trade Disputes. Singapore Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2002,(6):445~449
72 Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann. Justice as conflict resolution: proliferation, fragmentation, decentralization of dispute settlement in international trade. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,(27): 298~303 325~331
73 Holger Spamann. The Myth of Rebalancing Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement Practice. Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,9:31
2余敏友.WTO争端解决机制概论.上海人民出版社.2001:8~10
3缪剑文,鲍建强.世贸组织中的仲裁机制探析.国际贸易问题.1998,(3):19~25
4彭翔.论WTO中的仲裁机制.西南政法大学硕士论文.2004:71~73 19~20 25~26 7 6 40~41 29
5赵维田等.WTO的司法机制.上海人民出版社,2004:236 243~244 256~257
6 WTO.Canada-Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Products (Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes).WT/DS114/13,18 August 2000:12~13 3 39 13 1
7 WTO.EC-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones).WT/DS26/15, WT/DS48/13,29 May 1998:10 1 14 10
8 WTO.Korea-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverage.WT/DS75/16,WT/DS84/14,4 June 1999:11
9赵维田.世贸组织的法律制度.吉林人民出版社,2000: 465~467
10 Emmanuel Gaillard, John Savage. Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration. Kluwer Law International,1999:9~10
11蔡强.WTO争端解决中仲裁制度研究.武汉大学硕士论文.2005:41
12 WTO.United States-section 110 (5) of US copyright Act (complainant: European communities).WT/DS160,15 January 2001:1
13刘东洲.论世界贸易组织争端解决机制中仲裁制度的运用和完善—比较北美自由贸易区法律与实践.中国政法大学硕士论文.2007:23～24
14 Gaetan Verhoosel. The Use of Investor-State Arbitration under Bilateral Investment Treaties to Seek Relief for Breaches of WTO Law. Journal of International Economic Law. 2003:493~506
15陈安.国际投资争端仲裁—“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究.上海复旦大学出版社,2001:106~109 130
16 Georgios I.Zekos. An Examination of GATT/WTO Arbitration Procedure. Dispute Resolution Journal. 1999,11:73
17 Kara Leitner and Simon Lester. WTO Dispute Settlement 1995-2007—A Statistical Analysis. Journal of International Economic Law. 2008,3(11):179~192
18龚柏华,倪洁颖.中美有关铜版纸征收反倾销和反补贴税WTO磋商案评析.国际商务研究.2007,(6):49~ 53
19赵海峰.中国与国际司法机构关系的演进.法学评论.2008,(6):9~12
20余敏友.WTO争端解决活动—中国表现及其改进建议.法学评论.2008,(4):92~95
21宋洁.中美欧“汽车零部件案”的国际法分析.湖南行政学院学报.2007,(3):89~91
22 WTO.China-Measures Affecting Imports of Automobile Parts.AB-2008-10. WT/DS339/AB/R,WT/DS340/AB/R,WT/DS342/AB/R,15 December 2008:105
23余盛兴.败诉并不可怕—中国汽车零部件案在WTO败诉纪实.WTO经济导刊.2008, 9:92
24杨井鑫.WTO裁决中国在汽车零部件争端中败诉.中国贸易报.2008,7:12
25 WTO.China-Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights.WT/DS362/R,26 January 2009:134
26李晓明.中美知识产权案是美国贸易保护主义的大暴露.WTO经济导刊.2008, (6):71~72
27 WTO.Chile-Price Band System and Safeguard Measures Relating to Certain Agricultural Products.ARB-2002-2/15.WT/DS207/13,17 March 2003:1 8 11
28 WTO.Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry.WT/DS139/12, WT/DS142/12,4 October 2000:16
29 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation,Sale and Distribution of Bananas.WT/DS27/15,7 January 1998:6~7
30 WTO.United States-Measures Relating to Zeroing and Sunset Reviews. WT/DS322/21,11 May 2007:1
31 WTO.Dominican Republic-Measure Affecting the Importation and Internal Sale of Cigarettes.WT/DS302/17,29 August 2005:2
32 WTO.United States-Final Dumping Determination on Softwood Lumber from Canada.WT/DS264/13,13 December 2004:2
33 WTO.United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line pipe from Korea.WT/DS202/17,26 July 2002:2
34 WTO.United States-Anti-Dumping Act of 1916.WT/DS136/11,WT/DS162/14,28 February 2001:2 9~10
35 WTO.Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (Recourse to Arbitration by brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement). WT/DS46/ARB,28 August 2000:3
36 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of bananas(Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU).WT/DS27/ARB,9 April 1999:1 2~3 1 3 4 3
37 WTO.European Communities-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones).WT/DS26/ARB,WT/DS48/ARB,12 July 1999:4 4~5 5~6 1 3
38 WTO.United States-Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 ofthe DSU).WT/DS285/ARB,21 December 2007:78
39 WTO.European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas (Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU).WT/DS27/ARB/ECU,24 March 2000:36~37
40 WTO.United States-Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. WT/DS234/ARB,31 August 2004:48~49
41 WTO.Canada-Export Credits and Loan Guarantee for Regional Aircraft (Recourse to Arbitration by Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement).WT/DS222/ARB,17 February 2003:32~33 4~5 4
42 WTO.Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft.WT/DS46/ARB,28 August 2000:27 7 3~4 4
43 WTO.Indonesia-Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry.WT/DS54/15, WT/DS55/14,WT/DS59/13,WT/DS64/12,7 December 1998:8 3 8 2 1~2
44 WTO.Australia-Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon.WT/DS18/9,23 February 1999:9 1
45 WTO.Korea-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverage.WT/DS75/16,WT/DS84/14,4 June 1999:8
46赵建文.国际法新论.法律出版社,2000: 608
47 WTO.Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (Arbitration under Article 21(3)(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes). WT/DS8/15,WT/DS10/15,WT/DS11/13,14 February 1997:2 1 1
48朱榄叶.WTO争端解决程序中的证据问题.当代法学.2007,21(1):123~124
49戴维?帕尔米特[美].WTO中的争端解决:实践与程序.罗培新,李春林译.北京大学出版社,2005:240
50 Marco Bronckers, Naboth van den Broek. Financial Compensation in the WTO: Improving the Remedies of WTO Dispute Settlement. Journal of International Economic Law. 2005,3(8):101~126
51朱揽叶.世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析(1995-2002).法律出版社, 2004(下):622~654
52余敏友,席晶.论WTO争端解决机制中的证据规则.法学评论.2003,(5):92
53 WTO.United States-Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sale Corporations”(Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement).WT/DS108/ARB,30 August 2002:2
54 Yuka Fukunaga. Securing compliance through the WTO dispute settlement system: implementation of DSB recommendations. Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,6(9):411~415 419～425
55余丽.WTO执行争端次序问题:双边解决和多边完善.法律适用.2007,(2):45~49
56 Kym Anderson. Peculiarities of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement. WorldTrade Review.2002:126~127
57 Bruce Wilson. Compliance by WTO Members with Adverse WTO Dispute Settlement Rulings. Journal of International Economic Law. 2007,6(10):397~403
58张潇剑.WTO争端解决机制之利弊得失.文章来源于国际经济法网: http://www.intereconomiclaw.com/
59郑小敏.论WTO争端解决机制的执行程序.长沙理工大学学报(社会科学版). 2005, 6(2):41
60 Thomas Cottier. Preparing for Structural Reform in the WTO. Journal of International Economic Law. 2007,9(10): 497~508
61杨宏伟.WTO和举证责任.法制与社会.2007,10:63
62崔盈.WTO争端解决机制缺陷与完善研究.江西财经大学硕士论文.2004:21~22 33~34 23~24
63王波.论世贸组织的仲裁制度及我国仲裁制度的改革.湖北财经高等专科学校学报.2002,4(2):12~14
64张一君.WTO专家小组审理程序中的第三方介入问题.中国人民大学法律硕士论文.文章来源于国际经济法网: http://www.intereconomiclaw.com/
65颜芳.DSU机制视野下的“法庭之友”制度.法制与社会.2009,3(下):143
66纪文华,姜丽勇.WTO争端解决规则与中国的实践.北京大学出版社,2005:114
67余敏友,陈喜峰.WTO争端解决机制的改革谈判和我国的因应策略.国际经济法学刊.2004,10:118
68王贵国.国际贸易法.北京大学出版社,2004:406
69周元梅.WTO专家组工作程序制度的不足与完善.法制与社会.2007,(1):130
70张力,郭敏华.WTO争端解决机制的缺陷与完善.商业时代?理论.2005,(5):59 59~60
71 CL Lim. Law & Diplomacy in World Trade Disputes. Singapore Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2002,(6):445~449
72 Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann. Justice as conflict resolution: proliferation, fragmentation, decentralization of dispute settlement in international trade. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,(27): 298~303 325~331
73 Holger Spamann. The Myth of Rebalancing Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement Practice. Journal of International Economic Law. 2006,9:31