首页> 外文OA文献 >Revisiting procedure and precedent in the WTO : an analysis of 'US : countervailing and anti-dumping measures (China)'
【2h】

Revisiting procedure and precedent in the WTO : an analysis of 'US : countervailing and anti-dumping measures (China)'

机译:世贸组织的审查程序和先例:对“美国:反补贴和反倾销措施(中国)”的分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

After not applying countervailing duty (CVD) law against non-market economies (NMEs) for two decades, the United State opened a CVD investigation against China in 2006. After extensive litigation, a U.S. appeals court ruled that it was illegal to apply CVD law to NMEs. While that ruling was being appealed, the U.S. Congress passed legislation stipulating that the application of CVD law to NMEs starting in 2006 was legal. China challenged this legislation at the WTO. The dispute resulted in a ruling that left open the possibility that the legislation violated the GATT, as well as a finding that the United States must investigate its application of countervailing and antidumping duties against China. This dispute has implications for a number of current WTO debates including: whether Appellate Body rulings create binding precedent, whether the Appellate Body should have authority to remand cases, and what information should be required in panel requests.
机译:在对非市场经济体(NME)实施反补贴税(CVD)法律已有二十年之后,美国于2006年对中国进行了CVD调查。经过广泛的诉讼,美国上诉法院裁定适用CVD法是违法的NME。在对该裁决提出上诉的同时,美国国会通过了立法,规定从2006年开始将CVD法适用于NME。中国在世贸组织对这项立法提出了质疑。争端导致一项裁决,使该立法有可能违反关贸总协定,并裁定美国必须调查其对中国的反补贴和反倾销税的适用情况。该争端对当前的一些WTO辩论产生了影响,包括:上诉机构的裁决是否创建具有约束力的先例,上诉机构是否应有权发回案件以及专家组的要求中应提供哪些信息。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号