• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.699-733
• /
• 2000

This article analyzes the state-of-play of WTO dispute settlement for first four and a half years. Remarkable points found on this analysis are as follows: First, the Quad consisting of the United States, the European Community (EC), Canada and Japan has participated in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism more frequently than any other WTO member. Second, among developing country members some leading countries such as Korea, Brazil and India have relied actively upon the mechanism to claim and defend their rights and obligations under the WTO rules. Third, bilateral dispute settlements generally have been preferred to multilateral dispute settlements by the panel or Appellate Body. Fourth, observation of the Appellate Body proceedings well shows WTO members' strategy to use every process available to them. Fifth, the provisions of GATT 1994 have been most frequently invoked by the members. GATS and TRIPS Agreement disputes are mainly involved in developed countries, in particular the U.S. and the EC. Sixth, very high winning ratio in the panel and Appellate Body process indicates that complaining parties review the possibility to get favorable rulings even before referring to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and prepare for the case very thoroughly. Seventh, roughly speaking, disputes were settled within two or three years. Therefore, seeking bilateral dispute settlement can be more advantageous to a complaining party than referring to a panel or an arbitrator because of low costs and short time period in dispute settlement. Finally, the DSB approved retaliatory actions for winning complaining parties against the defending parties who had rejected implementation of its rulings and recommendations. In conclusion, it can be said that the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has been operated very successfully for the first four and a half years. It is hoped that continued study on state-of-play of WTO dispute settlement mechanism will be contributory to improved national interest of Korea.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.157-177
• /
• 2017

World Trade Organization(WTO) has 164 members since it has established on 1995. It plays a significant role in solving the world trade disputes. The process of the dispute settlement mechanism includes five steps: Negotiation, Establishment of experts group, Deliberation of appellate body, Execution and Supervision of Verdict and the Sanctions for Default. It suggested that the higher rate of developed countries using mechanism to solving the disputes than developing countries solving disputes by mechanism through the analysis of dispute of WTO members. Meanwhile, the more powerful economic entity is, the more trade dispute will be. There are several problems of mechanism by analysis the recently famous cases of trade disputes: Overburden of experts panel, Low utilization rate of the mechanism of developing countries, Lack of economic competition policy and labor standard terms and Unfulfillment of retaliatory measures of developing countries towards developed countries. This paper propose proper solutions and advises to improve mechanism of WTO dispute settlement.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권2호
• /
• pp.177-189
• /
• 2020

The dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is in great peril. The Appellate Body has ceased to function last December as the United States has blocked the appointment of new Appellate Body members since 2017. The focus of this study is on the examination of US's discontent on the Appellate Body and various efforts to reform the Appellate Body. In a recent report, the US Trade Representative raises its concerns on the Appellate Body including 90 days mandatory deadline, transitional rules for outgoing Appellate Body members, scope of appeal, advisory opinions, precedent, recommendation, and overreach without offering any viable solutions. Some of WTO members and experts proposed several Appellate Body reform measures but agreement between WTO members is unlikely in a foreseeable future. Alternative dispute settlement mechanisms should be seriously considered such as interim appeal arbitration arrangements, separate dispute settlement mechanisms for trade remedies, unilateral retaliatory measures without WTO authorization. Rules-based multilateral dispute settlement system is imperative to small open economies like Korea. The Korean government should actively participate in Appellate Body reform discussions with other WTO members to keep the WTO dispute settlement system from collapsing.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.618-642
• /
• 2009

현재 WTO에 가입한 국가는 국가 간 무역분쟁을 다룸에 있어서 WTO협정의 DSU 등에서 규정하고 있는 분쟁해결제도의 틀을 준수해야 한다. 더욱이 동 협정에서는 지역 자유무역협정을 체결하더라도 WTO의 분쟁해결제도를 원용할 수 있도록 규정하고 있다. 우리나라와 미국은 WTO의 핵심 회원국으로서 주요한 역할을 수행하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 한미 자유무역협정에는 별도의 분쟁해결제도를 도입하고 있다. 물론 일부 WTO의 분쟁해결제도를 벤치마킹한 부분이 존재하기도 하지만 분쟁해결을 위한 공동위원회 설치, 분야별 분쟁해결제도 별도 도입 등 상당부분 WTO 분쟁해결제도와는 차별화된 시도를 하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 한미 FTA와 WTO 양자의 무역분쟁해결제도를 상호 비교 고찰함으로써 실효성 측면 등 제 관점에서의 문제점을 도출하고 이를 근거로 그 대안 및 정책적 함의를 제시하고자 하였다. 이는 현재 추진하고 있거나 향후 추진할 FTA 협상에의 반영 및 국가 통상정책수립, 운용의 관점에서도 시사하는 바가 클 것으로 판단되며 특히 우리나라 일각에서는 한미 FTA 분쟁해결규정에 일부 문제가 있다는 지적이 제기되고 있는 바 이러한 관점에서 더욱 논의 및 연구 검토의 필요성이 존재한다.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• 제44권2호
• /
• pp.147-160
• /
• 2022

SRFC (Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission) requested to the ITLOS (International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) an advisory opinion relating to the IUU (Illegl, Unreported, and Unregulated) fishing (Case No-21 of the ITLOS). Since, in the UNCLOS, there is no article authorizing the jurisdiction of the ITLOS full court's Advisory opinion, so various scholarly opinion wad divided. But ITLOS delivered its Advisory opinion confirming its jurisdictional competence over the Advisory proceedings with its legal opinion about the IUU issues. It opens new possibility of the alternative dispute settlement mechanism of the ITLOS through the advisory procedures. In reality, there has been a view that ICJ (International Court of Justice) could take the part of a kind of dispute settlement through its Advisory procedures. But the advisory procedures of the ITLOS, with no definite clause in UNCLOS about the advisory procedures, which provides more allowances for the function of advisory opinion as the alternative dispute settlement mechanism. ITLOS accepted the requests of the advisory opinion by the State parties through international organization or themselves directly. And the advisory opinion of the ITLOS aims the interpretation and application into the special issues-specially IUU fishing in Case No. 21 of the ITLOS-. Those factors could enable more enhanced role of the ITLOS as an alternative dispute settlement mechanism. But those possibility has contain risk of excessive and unlimited advisory role of the ITLOS. So it is important to focus on the restriction on the role of the State parties in the request of the advisory opinion to the ITLOS. In this regard it is meaningful that the ITLOS has suggested a kind of legal standing in the advisory procedures in that only coastal States could request the Advisory opinion about the IUU in their EEZ. Furthermore the discretionary power of the ITLOS in the Article 138 of the Rules of the Tribunal could curtail the abuse of the Advisory opinion initiated by the States parties of the UNCLOS. Under this framework, Advisory opinion could broaden more alternative option to the disputes between State parties of the UNCLOS in that after being delivered detailed interpretation of the UNCLOS about the specific issues, States parties could devote themselves to searching for flexible solution for the disputes between State parties. It could obtain legal explanation about the dispute under the Article 297 and Article 298 by detouring the jurisdiction limits through advisory procedures.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.3-21
• /
• 2018

냉전시대부터 존재해 온 국제 협정과 기구는 이와 비슷한 목표와 역할을 가지고 탈냉전시대에 탄생한 수많은 새로운 국제 협정과 기구들로부터 어떠한 영향을 받는가? 이 질문에 대해 일부 학자들은 부정적 영향을 받을 수 있다고 주장하고 있다. 이 연구는 냉전시대에 기원을 두고 있는 국제기구 중 하나인 WTO의 경우에는 어떠한지를 검토하는데 그 목표가 있다. 즉 WTO의 분쟁해결절차의 이용 혹은 제소 건수가 이 기구의 회원국들이 참여한 다자적, 혹은 양자적 FTA의 경험과 국제기구 경험으로부터 긍정적 영향을 받는지, 혹은 부정적 영향을 받는지를 분석하고 있다. 이 분석은, 일부 학자들의 주장과는 달리, WTO가 출범한 1995년부터 2016년까지 모든 회원국들을 분석 대상으로 할 때 그들의 FTA 경험이 WTO 제소 건수를 증가시키는 경향이 있고, 또 유럽연합의 개별 회원국들을 제외한 모든 WTO 회원국들을 분석대상으로 할 때 그들의 국제기구 경험도 WTO 제소 건수를 증가시키는 경향이 있다는 결과를 나타내고 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제68권
• /
• pp.89-121
• /
• 2015

Investor-State Dispute Settlement(ISDS) grants a foreign investor the right to access an international arbitrator, if he believes actions taken by a host government are in breach of commitments made in an investment agreement or an investment treaty. The arbitration procedure of ICSID is made specifically to resolve investment disputes, so most of investment disputes have been settled in accordance with the procedure. Owing to limitation of dispute settlements through the ICSID arbitration procedure, several investment dispute conciliation schemes have been emerged as alternatives. In the case of a conciliation, the conciliation procedure will be in progress based on arbitrary agreement between parties, and if both parties agree on a conciliation program, then the arbitrary execution rate is relatively higher than that of arbitration procedures. In addition, it is evaluated that the time duration of conducting a conciliation procedure is in general rather short in 8 to 24months, and its incumbent cost is also rather inexpensive. Most of all, through amicable settlement of a dispute between a foreign investor and a host state, the foreign investor may continue his investment activities without a hitch, while the host state may invite more investment without any risk of losing its external credibility. In conclusion, it is desirable to lead any investment dispute between a foreign investor and a host state settle in accordance with the dispute settlement procedure as specified in the relevant investment agreement. In addition, to make the foreign investor continue his investment activities, it will be necessary to provide a separate investment dispute conciliation system aside from such arbitration procedures to cope any unexpected incident flexibly.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제4권1호
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 1994

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제47권5호
• /
• pp.273-288
• /
• 2022

This study first classifies and organizes provisions on institutional arrangements (or IAs) and dispute settlement mechanism(or DSM) in a digital trade agreement. Then it conducts a case study on seven major digital trade agreements: the CPTPP, the USJDTA, the USMCA, the ASDEA, the RCEP, the KSDPA, and the DEPA. And it finally derives implications for Korea to improve implementation of DTAs by communicating better and resolving disputes efficiently with the help of IAs and DSM-related provisions. IAs of a digital trade agreement can be defined as a set of agreements on the division of the respective responsibilities of agencies involved in implementing and enforcing the agreement, including committees, working groups, or contact points. DSM of a digital trade agreement includes consultation, mediation, arbitration, and establishment of a panel. Comparing six FTAs with an e-commerce chapter, the CPTPP, the USMCA, and the RCEP contain the most advanced type of IA provisions while the CPTPP, the USMCA, the RCEP, and the KSDPA have that of DSM provisions. Korea is its initial stage as it has only signed the KSDPA with Singapore as well as it is about to launch a new digital trade negotiation for the DEPA, the CPTPP, and even the IPEF, it is necessary to engage in negotiations with a clearer position on behalf of Korean digital companies. As provisions on IAs and DSM are important policy tools that can reflect industry concerns and convey proposals in inter-governmental dialogue, a Korean draft of the IAs and DSM-related provision should be prepared in advance.

• 항공우주산업기술동향
• /
• 제6권2호
• /
• pp.11-21
• /
• 2008

본 논문은 WTO 협정의 보조금규정 및 WTO 분쟁사례를 검토, 분석하여 공정무역체제하에서 국제규범에 저촉되지 않는 방향으로 우리나라의 항공우주산업지원방안을 마련하는데 중점을 두었다. 먼저 보조금의 요건인 재정적 공여 및 혜택에 대해 분석하였으며 보조금 중에서 금지보조금, 상계조치가능보조금으로 나뉘어 있는 규정을 검토하였고, 브라질과 캐나다, 미국과 EC 간의 항공기 분쟁사례에서 어떠한 쟁점이 있었는지를 검토하였다. 우리나라의 항공우주산업은 아직 국제경쟁력을 확보하지 못한 상태이므로 정부의 적극적인 지원이 필요하나 WTO 메카니즘에 의거하여 보조금에 해당해서는 안되므로 국제규범에 저촉되지 않는 다양한 지원방안을 제안했다.