英语论文网

留学生硕士论文 英国论文 日语论文 澳洲论文 Turnitin剽窃检测 英语论文发表 留学中国 欧美文学特区 论文寄售中心 论文翻译中心 我要定制

Bussiness ManagementMBAstrategyHuman ResourceMarketingHospitalityE-commerceInternational Tradingproject managementmedia managementLogisticsFinanceAccountingadvertisingLawBusiness LawEducationEconomicsBusiness Reportbusiness planresearch proposal

英语论文题目英语教学英语论文商务英语英语论文格式商务英语翻译广告英语商务英语商务英语教学英语翻译论文英美文学英语语言学文化交流中西方文化差异英语论文范文英语论文开题报告初中英语教学英语论文文献综述英语论文参考文献

ResumeRecommendation LetterMotivation LetterPSapplication letterMBA essayBusiness Letteradmission letter Offer letter

澳大利亚论文英国论文加拿大论文芬兰论文瑞典论文澳洲论文新西兰论文法国论文香港论文挪威论文美国论文泰国论文马来西亚论文台湾论文新加坡论文荷兰论文南非论文西班牙论文爱尔兰论文

小学英语教学初中英语教学英语语法高中英语教学大学英语教学听力口语英语阅读英语词汇学英语素质教育英语教育毕业英语教学法

英语论文开题报告英语毕业论文写作指导英语论文写作笔记handbook英语论文提纲英语论文参考文献英语论文文献综述Research Proposal代写留学论文代写留学作业代写Essay论文英语摘要英语论文任务书英语论文格式专业名词turnitin抄袭检查

temcet听力雅思考试托福考试GMATGRE职称英语理工卫生职称英语综合职称英语职称英语

经贸英语论文题目旅游英语论文题目大学英语论文题目中学英语论文题目小学英语论文题目英语文学论文题目英语教学论文题目英语语言学论文题目委婉语论文题目商务英语论文题目最新英语论文题目英语翻译论文题目英语跨文化论文题目

日本文学日本语言学商务日语日本历史日本经济怎样写日语论文日语论文写作格式日语教学日本社会文化日语开题报告日语论文选题

职称英语理工完形填空历年试题模拟试题补全短文概括大意词汇指导阅读理解例题习题卫生职称英语词汇指导完形填空概括大意历年试题阅读理解补全短文模拟试题例题习题综合职称英语完形填空历年试题模拟试题例题习题词汇指导阅读理解补全短文概括大意

商务英语翻译论文广告英语商务英语商务英语教学

无忧论文网

联系方式

留学生法律制度essay:关于全职上诉机构的创建

论文作者:英语论文论文属性:作业 Assignment登出时间:2014-09-25编辑:zcm84984点击率:13644

论文字数:3995论文编号:org201409201244217437语种:英语 English地区:美国价格:免费论文

关键词:全职上诉机构世界贸易组织市场收缩Appellate Body

摘要:本文是一篇关于全职上诉机构的创建的留学生法律制度essay,作为2009年的经济危机产生的后果,政治领导人正越来越多地掩盖来自全球的竞争性市场国家在市场收缩的时间。截至2008年,153个成员国和30个观察国是世界贸易组织(WTO)的缔约国。

law essay

作为2009年的经济危机产生的后果,政治领导人正越来越多地掩盖来自全球的竞争性市场国家在市场收缩的时间。截至2008年,153个成员国和30个观察国是世界贸易组织(WTO)的缔约国。[1]在全球产出可能减少甚至停止的情况下,世贸组织的重要性正日益显露出来,而国家也在寻找方法拯救国内产业。可以预期的是,如果世贸组织的主要目的是通过限制贸易壁垒自由化的全球贸易和经济发展, WTO的司法部门在开发一个判例以鼓励贸易自由化。争端解决机构(DSB)的决定导致了国家实施贸易限制,而不是贸易自由化。

不同于传统的国内法庭,DNA双链断裂必须借鉴其他学科,如商业、政治学、经济学和法学的更大的杠杆作用。该过程还涉及很多不仅仅是当事人更多的参与者,如非政府组织


I Introduction

As a consequence of the economic crisis of 2009, political leaders are increasingly sheltering their countries from global competitive markets during a time of market contractions. As of 2008, 153 member nations and 30 observing nations are party to the World Trade Organization (WTO). [1] The importance of the WTO is increasingly come to light, as a halt to the potential reduction in global outputs, while countries look inwardly to save domestic industry. If the main purpose of the WTO is to liberalize global trade and economic development by restricting trade barriers, it would be expected that the WTO’s judicial branch would develop a jurisprudence that encouraged trade-liberalization. The decisions handed down by the Dispute Settlement Bodies (DSB) have led countries to implement trade-restrictive, instead of trade-liberalizing, measures. [2]

Unlike a traditional domestic court, the DSBs must draw from a greater leverage of other disciplines, such as business, politics, economics and law. The process also involves many more actors than just the parties, such as Non-Governmental Organizations, Inter-Governmental Organizations, and non-state actors, which affect a significant population globally. The accession of China and the rising use of the system by developing countries have caused a significant shift in the expected policies and Proposals of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). Balancing on a teeter-totter between diplomacy and law, the DSB has difficulty adhering to either, doing neither justice. Does the AB need increased guidance? Does the current DSU structure need change? Should the WTO increasingly meddle in sensitive democratic processes in sovereign countries?

Recently, the WTO’s Appellate Body (AB) adjudication and enforcement of trading issues, has been met with sharp criticism. The AB’s actions have limited its ability to fulfill its primary purpose, of ensuring the proper functioning of the trade liberalization regime. Article 19 of the DSU states that “where a panel or the AB concludes that a measure is inconsistent with a covered agreement, it shall recommend that the Member concerned bring the measure into conformity with that agreement.” [3] This broad wording can lead to contradictory results. In the Australia – Salmon case, “bringing a measure into conformity” mean both raising a trade barrier or lowering a trade barrier. [4] AB’s decisions often lead to the introduction of more, rather than less, trade-restrictive measures in the losing party country. [5] Taking into account the current economic climate, the AB’s decisions would serve to encourage the formation of trade barriers by giving countries a choice in compliance. The general structure of domestic policy tends to lead to states adopting the more restrictive measure in implementation.

Some would argue that the AB only has the power specified in Article 19 of the DSU. It provides that “where a panel or the Appellate Body concludes that a measure is inconsistent with a论文英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写英语论文代写代写论文代写英语论文代写留学生论文代写英文论文留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。

共 1/8 页首页上一页1234567下一页尾页

英国英国 澳大利亚澳大利亚 美国美国 加拿大加拿大 新西兰新西兰 新加坡新加坡 香港香港 日本日本 韩国韩国 法国法国 德国德国 爱尔兰爱尔兰 瑞士瑞士 荷兰荷兰 俄罗斯俄罗斯 西班牙西班牙 马来西亚马来西亚 南非南非