法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库>>全文
WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism(2)/刘成伟(62)
Second, in the case of measures shown by Japan to have been introduced prior to the conclusion of the tariff negotiations at issue, it is our view that Japan has raised a presumption that the United States should be held to have anticipated those measures and it is for the United States to rebut that presumption. In this connection, it is our view that the United States is charged with knowledge of Japanese government measures as of the date of their publication. We realize that knowledge of a measure's existence is not equivalent to understanding the impact of the measure on a specific product market. For example, a vague measure could be given substance through enforcement policies that are initially unexpected or later changed significantly. However, where the United States claims that it did not know of a measure's relevance to market access conditions in respect of film or paper, we would expect the United States to clearly demonstrate why initially it could not have reasonably anticipated the effect of an existing measure on the film or paper market and when it did realize the effect. Such a showing will need to be tied to the relevant points in time (i.e., the conclusions of the Kennedy, Tokyo and Uruguay Rounds) in order to assess the extent of the United States' legitimate expectations of benefits from these three Rounds. A simple statement that a Member's measures were so opaque and informal that their impact could not be assessed is not sufficient. While it is true that in most past non-violation cases, one could easily discern a clear link between a product-specific action and the effect on the tariff concession that it allegedly impaired, one can also discern a link between general measures affecting the internal sale and distribution of products, such as rules on advertising and premiums, and tariff concessions on products in general.”


总共85页     [1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   [5]   [6]   [7]   [8]   [9]   [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]   [14]   [15]   [16]   [17]   [18]   [19]   [20]   [21]   [22]   [23]   [24]   [25]   [26]   [27]   [28]   [29]   [30]   [31]   [32]   [33]   [34]   [35]   [36]   [37]   [38]   [39]   [40]   [41]   [42]   [43]   [44]   [45]   [46]   [47]   [48]   [49]   [50]   [51]   [52]   [53]   [54]   [55]   [56]   [57]   [58]   [59]   [60]   [61]   62   [63]   [64]   [65]   [66]   [67]   [68]   [69]   [70]   [71]   [72]   [73]   [74]   [75]   [76]   [77]   [78]   [79]   [80]   [81]   [82]   [83]   [84]   [85]  
上一页     下一页    

声明:本论文由《法律图书馆》网站收藏,
仅供学术研究参考使用,
版权为原作者所有,未经作者同意,不得转载。
法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库