Analysis of the comparision of WTO and NAFTA dispute settlement mechanism and jurisdictional conflicts－From Mexico－Soft Drinks case analysis

• Main Author: 胡美蓁
• Other Authors: 許耀明
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/37278680745586945553

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 法學院碩士在職專班 === 101 === In recent decades, the norms of international law diversify,in addition to the previous WTO ,RTA also flourished and became the international trends.Because of RTA’s rising,dispute settlement bodies have increased significantly,but most of RTAs have their own dispute settlement mechanisms.On the one hand,WTO and RTA have jurisdiction also generate conflicts of jurisdiction in international trade disputes. On the other hand, WTO law does not provide the interaction rule to resolve the conflicts between WTO-RTA dispute settlement mechanisms,thus, the Dispute Settlement Body under the parallel trial of the same or similar obligations, referee conflicts may arise.Therefor, only to think about the interactive issues of overlapping jurisdiction of the two dispute settlement systems can helps to avoid the potential issues. In Mexico－Soft Drinks case, the United States and Mexico are both the Member States of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexico filed a complaint to NAFTA first, because of the disputes of NAFTA agreement,the United States then complaint to WTO in respect of the dispute. Therefore, Mexico argued that the case should not be accepted the case in WTO dispute settlement procedures, but by the NAFTA dispute settlement body, in order to make the case to get thoroughly resolved.But WTO did not accept Mexico’s claim, the rulings of WTO panel and Appellate Body were unanimously affirmed that WTO has the jurisdiction of the case.By this case,we knew that WTO identified as the jurisdiction of a dispute by “Understandin On Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes “(DSU) and Dispute Settlement Body(DSB), but did not consider the jurisdiction of WTO-RTA may arise conflicts, as well as the conflicts may be caused by the impact of the global trade order. However, in this case, the Appellate Body put forward the concept of "legal impediment", this article attempts to explore "legal impediment" where could make WTO reject the trial, and then recognize the the RTA jurisdiction, in order to reduce the impact of WTO-RTA jurisdictional conflicts.If WTO Dispute Settlement Body would like to have an open attitude to respect the ruling of RTA ,then, it is possible to make the mutual respect and co-exist between WTO and RTA dispute settlement mechanisms, and to ensure the security and predictability of international trade.