Good Faith in WTO Dispute Settlement

A. Mitchell
{"title":"Good Faith in WTO Dispute Settlement","authors":"A. Mitchell","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3157444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"[The definition of good faith in international law has been largely elusive, and its indefinite boundaries complicate its use in the World Trade Organization. Nevertheless, good faith is almost certainly a general principle of law and a principle of customary international law. It is also a principle of WTO law that is reflected in several provisions of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. WTO Tribunals may use the principle of good faith not merely to interpret WTO provisions, but also in the exercise of their inherent jurisdiction, such as when employing the doctrine of estoppel, which is one particularisation of good faith. However, the use of good faith in WTO dispute settlement entails three important considerations and qualifications. First, the principle should not be used to overwhelm WTO provisions that appear to be based on concepts similar to those underlying the principle of good faith, such as non-violation complaints, which are subject to detailed rules. Second, the principle should not be confused with other principles that may appear to be related, particularly due process. Third, in my view, WTO Tribunals have no legal basis for finding that a Member has violated a principle of good faith independent of a violation of a WTO provision. Some existing reports err in this regard.] CONTENTS I Introduction II Good Faith in International Law outside the WTO A A General Principle of Law B A Principle of Customary International Law C Towards a Definition of Good Faith D Particularisations of Good Faith 1 Performance of Treaties: Pacta Sunt Servanda 2 Interpretation of Treaties: VCLT Article 31(1) 3 Estoppel 4 Abuse of Rights III Using Good Faith in WTO Disputes A Good Faith as a Principle of WTO Law B Procedural Implications of Good Faith 1 Engaging in Dispute Settlement Procedures (DSU Article 3.10). 2 Resorting to Dispute Settlement (DSU Articles 3.7, 23) 3 Good Faith and Inherent Jurisdiction: Estoppel C Substantive Implications of Good Faith 1 Performance of WTO Obligations: Pacta Sunt Servanda 2 Non-Violation Complaints 3 General Exceptions and Abuse of Rights IV Conclusion Men must be able to assume that those with whom they deal in the general intercourse of society will act in good faith. (1) I INTRODUCTION The principle of good faith has a great deal of normative appeal, and most commentators would acknowledge that it plays a role in all legal systems. The ordinary meaning of good faith is 'honesty of purpose or sincerity of declaration' or the 'expectation of such qualities in others'. (2) 'Good faith' is often used interchangeably with 'bona fides', which is defined as 'freedom from intent to deceive'. (3) The touchstone of good faith is therefore honesty, a subjective state of mind, but the principle can also incorporate notions of fairness and reasonableness, both of which concern an objective state of affairs. Unfortunately, terms like honesty, fairness and reasonableness are almost as vague as good faith. This leads Rosenne to ask of good faith: 'Is it a principle and a rule of law, having an identifiable and where necessary enforceable legal content, or is it nothing more than a throw-back to outmoded natural law concepts?' (4) If good faith has no independent legal content, it may be of little use to World Trade Organization Tribunals in resolving disputes: 'one may acknowledge the power and attraction of a general idea but the idea may be so general that it is of no practical utility to the merchant'. (5) In this article, I attempt to clarify the meaning of good faith to the extent relevant to the WTO, by examining good faith as a general principle of law, a principle of customary international law, and a principle of WTO law. Below, I start by considering the existence and meaning of the principle of good faith in international law outside the WTO. …","PeriodicalId":42243,"journal":{"name":"Melbourne Journal of International Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"39","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Melbourne Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3157444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 39

Abstract

[The definition of good faith in international law has been largely elusive, and its indefinite boundaries complicate its use in the World Trade Organization. Nevertheless, good faith is almost certainly a general principle of law and a principle of customary international law. It is also a principle of WTO law that is reflected in several provisions of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. WTO Tribunals may use the principle of good faith not merely to interpret WTO provisions, but also in the exercise of their inherent jurisdiction, such as when employing the doctrine of estoppel, which is one particularisation of good faith. However, the use of good faith in WTO dispute settlement entails three important considerations and qualifications. First, the principle should not be used to overwhelm WTO provisions that appear to be based on concepts similar to those underlying the principle of good faith, such as non-violation complaints, which are subject to detailed rules. Second, the principle should not be confused with other principles that may appear to be related, particularly due process. Third, in my view, WTO Tribunals have no legal basis for finding that a Member has violated a principle of good faith independent of a violation of a WTO provision. Some existing reports err in this regard.] CONTENTS I Introduction II Good Faith in International Law outside the WTO A A General Principle of Law B A Principle of Customary International Law C Towards a Definition of Good Faith D Particularisations of Good Faith 1 Performance of Treaties: Pacta Sunt Servanda 2 Interpretation of Treaties: VCLT Article 31(1) 3 Estoppel 4 Abuse of Rights III Using Good Faith in WTO Disputes A Good Faith as a Principle of WTO Law B Procedural Implications of Good Faith 1 Engaging in Dispute Settlement Procedures (DSU Article 3.10). 2 Resorting to Dispute Settlement (DSU Articles 3.7, 23) 3 Good Faith and Inherent Jurisdiction: Estoppel C Substantive Implications of Good Faith 1 Performance of WTO Obligations: Pacta Sunt Servanda 2 Non-Violation Complaints 3 General Exceptions and Abuse of Rights IV Conclusion Men must be able to assume that those with whom they deal in the general intercourse of society will act in good faith. (1) I INTRODUCTION The principle of good faith has a great deal of normative appeal, and most commentators would acknowledge that it plays a role in all legal systems. The ordinary meaning of good faith is 'honesty of purpose or sincerity of declaration' or the 'expectation of such qualities in others'. (2) 'Good faith' is often used interchangeably with 'bona fides', which is defined as 'freedom from intent to deceive'. (3) The touchstone of good faith is therefore honesty, a subjective state of mind, but the principle can also incorporate notions of fairness and reasonableness, both of which concern an objective state of affairs. Unfortunately, terms like honesty, fairness and reasonableness are almost as vague as good faith. This leads Rosenne to ask of good faith: 'Is it a principle and a rule of law, having an identifiable and where necessary enforceable legal content, or is it nothing more than a throw-back to outmoded natural law concepts?' (4) If good faith has no independent legal content, it may be of little use to World Trade Organization Tribunals in resolving disputes: 'one may acknowledge the power and attraction of a general idea but the idea may be so general that it is of no practical utility to the merchant'. (5) In this article, I attempt to clarify the meaning of good faith to the extent relevant to the WTO, by examining good faith as a general principle of law, a principle of customary international law, and a principle of WTO law. Below, I start by considering the existence and meaning of the principle of good faith in international law outside the WTO. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
WTO争端解决中的诚信原则
国际法对诚信的定义在很大程度上是难以捉摸的,其不确定的边界使其在世界贸易组织中的使用复杂化。然而,诚信几乎肯定是一项一般法律原则和习惯国际法原则。这也是世贸组织法律的一项原则,反映在《关于解决争端规则和程序的谅解》的若干条款中。世贸组织的法庭不仅可以使用诚信原则来解释世贸组织的规定,而且还可以在行使其固有管辖权时使用诚信原则,例如在采用禁止反悔原则时,这是诚信的一种具体规定。然而,在世贸组织争端解决中使用诚信需要三个重要的考虑和条件。首先,不应该用这一原则来压倒世贸组织的规定,这些规定似乎是基于与诚信原则基础上的概念类似的概念,例如不违反规定的申诉,这些规定必须遵守详细的规则。第二,该原则不应与其他似乎相关的原则,特别是正当程序相混淆。第三,在我看来,世贸组织法庭没有法律依据裁定一成员违反诚信原则而不违反世贸组织规定。现有的一些报告在这方面有错误。[参考译文]目录I导论II WTO以外国际法中的诚信A A一般法律原则B A习惯国际法原则C关于诚信的定义D诚信的具体规定1条约的履行:条约必须遵守2条约的解释VCLT第31(1)条3禁止反悔4权利滥用3在WTO争端中使用诚信A诚信作为WTO法律原则B诚信的程序含义1参与争端解决程序(DSU第3.10条)2诉诸争端解决(DSU第3.7条、23条)3诚信与固有管辖权:禁止反悔C诚信的实质性影响1履行WTO义务:必须遵守公约2非违规投诉3一般例外和滥用权利4结论人们必须能够假设,在一般社会交往中与他们打交道的人将诚信行事。诚信原则具有很大的规范性吸引力,大多数评论家都会承认它在所有法律制度中都发挥着作用。诚信的一般含义是“目的诚实或声明真诚”或“期望他人具备这些品质”。(2) “Good faith”经常与“bona fides”互换使用,后者被定义为“没有欺骗意图”。(3)因此,诚信的试金石是诚实,这是一种主观的心理状态,但这一原则也可以包括公平和合理的概念,这两个概念都涉及到客观的事态。不幸的是,像诚实、公平和合理这样的术语几乎和诚信一样模糊。这让罗森提出了关于诚信的问题:“它是一种原则和法律规则,具有可识别的、必要时可强制执行的法律内容,还是只不过是对过时的自然法概念的回归?”(4)如果诚信没有独立的法律内容,那么它对于世界贸易组织的法庭在解决争端时可能就没什么用处了:“人们可以承认一般观念的力量和吸引力,但这种观念可能太过普遍,对商人没有实际效用”。(5)在本文中,我试图通过审查诚信作为一般法律原则、习惯国际法原则和WTO法原则,在与WTO相关的程度上澄清诚信的含义。下面,我将首先考虑诚信原则在WTO之外的国际法中的存在及其意义。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊最新文献
Protection of Climate Displaced Persons under International Law: A Case Study from Mataso Island, Vanuatu Indigenous Consent: A Self-Determination Perspective A Requiem for the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Something New, Something Old and Something Borrowed? International cooperation and responsibility sharing to combat climate change: Lessons for international refugee law Affective Critique: Fear, Hope, Abandonment and Pleasure in Dianne Otto's Living with International Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1