摘要
为化解主权债务危机对欧元乃至欧盟金融稳定构成的威胁,欧元区国家首先创建一系列应急性金融稳定机制。鉴于这些援救工具与欧元区债务危机长期化趋势存在结构性矛盾,因此,欧洲决策者们随即决定创设永久性金融稳定机制——"欧洲稳定机制"。这一旨在确保整个欧元区以及其成员国金融稳定的法律框架虽被认为违反了欧盟法,但欧洲法院凭借对欧盟法的灵活性解释,成功调和了两者在法律上的矛盾。"欧洲稳定机制"的运行有助于改善欧盟区域治理,促进了欧元区国家金融与财政政策一体化乃至全球金融稳定,其彰显的合作精神也为维护全球金融稳定提供了思路。
Recendy,domestic judicial decision-making theory influences on the international dispute settlement mechanism significantly,such as the system of precedents.In International judicial decisions,the unanimity towards same legal issues is guaranteed by precedential effect.However,it is not always available to reach the unanimity.In WTO framework,although the system of precedents is not expressly provided in the WTO agreements,but juridical practices of the dispute settlement already developed jurisprudence on following and going against precedent.More specifically,US-Zeroing cases,US- Countervailing and Anti-dumping cases,the China- Rare earth case involve legal issues related to go against precedent effect.After exploring those cases above,the applicability of the general exception clause on China’s Accession Protocol could be argued again later.Therefore,after the China-rare earth case,China should actively develop new arguments and reasons in the subsequent cases,which included the same legal issues,in order to discover "cogent reasons" to compel the panel and Appellate Body to make a fair reasoning and finding.
出处
《武大国际法评论》
CSSCI
2015年第1期260-279,共20页
Wuhan University International Law Review
基金
2011年度重庆社会科学规划项目“中国一东盟自由贸易区争端解决机制研究”(2011YBFX100)
2013年度国家法治与法学理论研究重点项目“入世十年后中国WTO争端应对法律问题研究”(13SFB1007)的研究成果
关键词
欧元区
稳定机制
金融援助
WTO dispute settlement mechanism
precedent effect
cogent reason
China-Rare earth case
