Law Studies Of The WTO And RTAs Trade Disputes Jurisdiction Conflicts

This thesis is focused on the conflicts of jurisdiction between WTO mechanismand RTAs mechanism. The high increase of regional trade agreements promotes theregional and multilateral trade liberalization on one hand, and on the other hand, itshocks the multilateral trading system. There exist lots of conflicts between the twosystems, the most obvious one is the jurisdiction conflict between the regional tradingsystem and the multilateral trading system. In some circumstance, a WTO member,while it is in the meantime a member of one regional trade agreement, violates theobligations under RTAs, it breaches its WTO obligations at the same time.Consequently, both the WTO and the RTA have jurisdiction over the certain dispute insuch situation, which leads to the following problems that different parties might seekrelief before different dispute mechanisms at the same time (which is called parallelproceedings) or they might bring the same litigation to the RTA/WTO while theWTO/RTA dispute settlement proceedings had already began (that is, repeat actions).It is a concrete embodiment of jurisdictional conflict between the two types of disputesettlement mechanism. Thus, this article focuses on how to coordinate this veryconflict.The article consists of five parts: Part I starts from the relationship of RTAs andWTO law and legal basis of both institutions. Their legal basis includes The24thArticle of the GATT1994of the WTO Law, On the Understanding of theInterpretation of Article24thof the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, theDifferential and More Favorable Treatment, Reciprocity on Developing CountriesParticipate Fully in the Decision (Authorization Clause) and the5thArticle of GATS.The24thArticle of the GATT1994is a basic article which provides relationships ofthem, it is also constitutes basic regulations along with other relative articles. Next，this part will analyze legal basis of the dispute settlement jurisdiction each in theWTO laws and in the Regional Trade Agreements. The last of this part comes to studyfurther relationships between provisions of the jurisdiction of the two mechanisms,and concludes that there is a conflict of jurisdiction between the two systems.Part II, taking into account of the existing case specifically, analyses itsembodiments and legal consequences of the conflict as well as causes of the conflictsof jurisdiction between the two systems. Part III is the most important and difficult part of this thesis. It mainly discussesthe resolution of the conflicts. Firstly, expand the interpretation of Article24thofGATT in to the period of dispute resolution. In another words, that means to make theRTAs dispute mechanism combined with the regulation of the WTO law to expand thescope of jurisdiction of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism and thus tocoordinate the jurisdictional conflicts of the two mechanism. This part is analyzed bythe rule of VCLE which is called ordinary meaning, context and the purpose andobject. Then it is concluded that the purpose and object approach can expand itsinterpretation of Article24of GATT1994. Secondly, uses some principles of theinternational law coordinating the conflict, taking into consideration of the principlesof good faith, estoppel and res judicata as examples. This article stresses on theprinciple of res judicata, good faith and estoppel. Although the panel of WTO disputesettlement has not invoked these international principles to reject its jurisdiction ofcases before it yet. This article is meant to combine these three principles to make therejection of jurisdictions more persuasive.Part IV is the study of strategies to the jurisdiction conflicts between WTO andRTAs and the tactics that China might take.Paqrt V is the conclusion of this thesis.