A Study On The Identification Standard Of "Likeness" Of Services Under GATS

In WTO practices of trade in services,the identification of likeness is the core issue in the application of the principle of non-discrimination.On this issue,due to the lack of clarity of GATS provisions and the lack of unity in judicial practice,the identification standard of the likeness of trade in services is full of controversy and uncertainty.In the Argentine Financial Services case,released on April 14,2016,the Appellate Body made a special and detailed discussion on the identification of like services and service suppliers in GATS.This undoubtedly plays an important role in determining the identification standard of likeness in GATS.Therefore,by combing the judgment standard of likeness in the past WTO practices and the development of Argentine Financial Services case,combined with the existing research results in academic circles,this paper will elaborate on the identification of likeness in detail.It also puts forward some suggestions for further improvement in order to construct a more operable standard for the identification of the likeness of trade in services.This paper is divided into three parts:introduction,main body and conclusion,in which the main body is divided into four chapters:The first chapter briefly introduces the background and concept of the principle of non-discrimination in GATS,and then leads to the problems existing in the identification of likeness in the principle of non-discrimination in GATS.In this chapter,the author expound in detail the reasons why the similarity in GATS is more difficult to identify because of the particularity of trade in services and the complex relationship between services and service suppliers.The second chapter reviews the views expressed by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on the identification of likeness in previous cases,and summarizes the legal principles.It also highlights the merits of the Argentine Financial Services case,the respective arguments of the disputing parties and the main points of view on similar issues in the reports of the Panel and the Appellate Body.The Appellate Body used the source method and objective method to overturn the Panel on the same nature of the identification,which provides an important basis for further analysis.The third chapter,according to the legal principle formed in the past cases and the development in the Argentine Financial Services case,summarizes the preliminary identification based on the sources in GATS,and then analyzes the similar identification steps of the substantive standards.Then,the relationship between services and service suppliers is also analyzed,and it is considered that how to correctly grasp the relationship between the two concepts remains to be further clarified in the reports of the subsequent Panel and Appellate Body.The fourth chapter expounds in detail the two similar identification standards in GATT:objective method and aim and effect method,and discusses in detail the feasibility and specific applicable methods of the two methods in GATS.Through the analysis,it is considered that the objective method has more applicable space in GATS,and there are still some problems in the application of the aim and effect method.