国际经济法学刊(第22卷第1期)(2015)
上QQ阅读APP看书,第一时间看更新

On the Necessity and Feasibility of Self-correction of the Appellate Body's Previous Decisions from the Perspective of China-Rare Earths Case

Feng Xuewei

【Abstract】 The WTO dispute settlement has been frequently used by its Members in recent years. Over the 20 years of rich practice, the Appellate Body established a de facto stare decisis rule for the WTO similar to that which exists in common law system. Given the time constraint that the Appellate Body is facing, it cannot avoid a situation that there is no sufficient time available for the Appellate Body to consider thoroughly all the elements for the interpretation of a provision, including arguments or evidence of law that have not been raised even by the parties nor by the panel. Consequently, in a later dispute concerning the same issue, other relevant elements may be raised by parties in the proceedings. Should Panels and the Appellate Body derogate from its previous interpretation set out in a precedent? If so, under what conditions? The issue of whether GATT Article 20 can be invoked by China to justify a violation of paragraph 11.3 of its accession protocol has been decided in China-Raw Materials dispute, can this issue be reopened and assessed again in China-Rare Earths case? Is the precedent in the previous case a good one that reasonably addressed all the relevant legitimate considerations for interpretation? If not, can the Appellate Body reassess the interpretative issue and come out with a new interpretation by making corrections? This has happened in China-Rare Earths case, although in a limited manner, due to the refraint of China's appeal. The author explored these two cases in the light of the relevant WTO precedents as well as the common law thinking. This article concludes that it is both necessary and technically feasible for the Appellate Body to correct certain interpretation made in previous cases. It will contribute to further improvement of the WTO dispute settlement system and give more confidences to Members that their rights and obligations under the treaty will be well preserved by such a system with a build-in self-correction mechanism.

[1] 作者系锦天城律师事务所高级顾问,中国稀土案代理律师。

[2] Appellate Body Report, Japan-Alcoholic Beverages, WT/DS/8/AB/R WT/DS/10/AB/R WT/DS/11/AB/R, adopted on October 4, 1996, p.14, including footnote therein.

[3] Appellate Body Report, US-Stainless Steel from Mexico, WT/DS/344/AB/R, adopted on April 30, 2008, para.158-160.

[4] Panel Report, US-CV/AD Measures, WT/DS/449/R, adopted on March 27, 2014, para.7.317.

[5] Ibid. In this case, the panel interpreted "appropriate amount" in Article 19.3 of SCM, with VCLT Articles 31 and 32, GATT Article VI:5, Tokyo Round Subsidy Code Article15 b and drafting history of SCM.

[6]H.C. Black, Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., West Publishing Co., 1990, p.1176.

[7] Ibid.,p.1406.

[8]P.S. Atiyah & Robert S. Summers, Form and Substance in Anglo-American Law: A Comparative Study of Legal Reasoning, Legal Theory, and Legal Institutions, Clarendon Press, 1987, p.116.

[9] Ibid., p.118.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406-407, 410 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting).

[12] Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 665 (1944).

[13]P.S. Atiyah & Robert S. Summers, Form and Substance in Anglo-American Law: A Comparative Study of Legal Reasoning, Legal Theory, and Legal Institutions, Clarendon Press, 1987, pp.48-49.

[14] Supreme Court of Illinois, Moilitor v. Community,18 Ill. 2d. 11; 163 N.E.2d; 89; 1959 Ill. LEXIS 390; 86 A.L.R.2d 469, p.7

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid., pp.7-8.

[17] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.80.

[18] Ibid., paras. 7.81-7.84.

[19] Ibid., paras. 7.82, 7.89.

[20] Ibid., para. 7.93.

[21] Ibid., para. 7.94.

[22] Ibid., para. 7.95.

[23] Ibid., paras. 7.97-7.98.

[24] Ibid., para. 7.101.

[25] Ibid., para. 7.102.

[26] Ibid., para. 7.104.

[27] 中国第一次书面陈述,第447、448段。

[28] 同上,第455—457段。

[29] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para. 7.111.

[30] Ibid., paras. 7.112-7.114.

[31] Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, para.5.29.

[32] Ibid.,para.5.30.

[33] Ibid.,para.5.34.

[34] Ibid.,para.5.42.

[35] Ibid.,para.5.43.

[36] Ibid.,para.5.44.

[37] Ibid.,para.5.45.

[38] Ibid.,paras.5.46, 5.50.

[39] Ibid.,para.5.61.

[40] 对照专家组说的,不能对有先例的问题进行“重新审查”的结论。Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.60. Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, para.5.62.

[41] Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, paras.5.63-5.64.

[42] Ibid.,para.5.65.

[43] Ibid.,para.5.66.

[44] Ibid.,para.5.67.

[45] Ibid.,para.5.68.

[46] Ibid.,para.5.69.

[47] Ibid.,para.5.72.

[48] Ibid.,para.5.73.

[49] Ibid.,para.5.72.

[50] Ibid.,para.5.74.

[51] Ibid., para. 5.72.

[52] Ibid., para.5.73.

[53] China's Appellant Submission, paras. 107-108.

[54] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para. 7.94.

[55] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.99.

[56] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.103.

[57] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.104.

[58]We have recently confirmed this principle in our Report in Korea-Definitive Safeguard Measure on Imports of Certain Dairy Products, WT/DS98/AB/R, circulated 14 December 1999, para. 81. See also Appellate Body Report, United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,WT/DS2/AB/R, adopted May 20, 1996, p.23; Appellate Body Report, Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted November 1, 1996, p.12; Appellate Body Report, India-Patents, supra, footnote 25, para. 45.

[59] Appellate Body Report, Argentina-Footware, WT/DS/121/ AB/R, adopted on December 14, 1999, paras. 81, 83-84.

[60] Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, para. 5.62.

[61] Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, para. 5.65.

[62] Appellate Body Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/AB/R WT/DS/432/AB/R WT/DS/433/AB/R, adopted on August 7, 2014, paras. 5.63-5.64.

[63] Russia's Oral Statement during the first Panel Substantive meeting.

[64] China's Second Written Submission, paras. 207-210, 213-215.

[65] China's Second Written Submission, para. 209.

[66] China's First Written Submission, paras.432-434. China's Second Written Submission, para. 209.

[67] China's First Written Submission, paras. 436-444..

[68] China's First Written Submission, paras. 422, 444. China's Second Written Submission, para. 210. China's response to Panel question 5, paras.8 26-29.

[69] China's Response to Panel question 16, para.85, China's response to Panel question 3, paras.8 and 11.

[70] China's Second Written Submission, paras. 210.

[71] China's First Written Submission, paras.436-444.

[72] China's First Written Submission, paras. 445-458.

[73] Panel Report, China-Rare Earths, WT/DS/431/R WT/DS/432/R WT/DS/433/R, adopted on March 26, 2014, para.7.59.

[74] Ibid., para. 7.94. The Panel stated: "It is not strictly necessary for the Panel to address the remaining elements of China's arguments", instead, the Panel only offered "observations on some of them".

[75] Ibid. See Panel Report, para.7.66

[76] Ibid., paras. 7.90-7.93.

[77] Ibid., para. 7.94. The Panel deems unnecessary to analyze the relevance of Articles II, XI, XX of the GATT 1994.