`Good Faith` in the WTO Jurisprudence - Necessary Balancing Element or an Open Door to Judicial Activism?
`Good Faith` in the WTO Jurisprudence - Necessary Balancing Element or an Open Door to Judicial Activism?
复制标题
世贸组织判例中的“善意”——必要的平衡要素还是司法能动主义的大门？
DOI：
10.1093/jiel/jgi043
复制
发表时间：
2005
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
H. Zeitler
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Zeitler
该条的目的有两个：第一，它试图澄清和安排诚信原则进入世贸组织判例的背景;第二，它分析了这种进入所带来的潜在影响和风险，例如对专家组或上诉机构司法能动性的指控，以及区分违反和非违反案件的可行性。它试图界定一个框架，在这个框架内必须找到适用诚信的适当概念，并探讨了上诉机构迄今为止以必要的谨慎适用诚信的结论。然而，它告诫必须避免过于广泛地使用这一概念，并要求司法机构比迄今为止更清楚地阐明这一概念在特定案件中的内容及其法律的后果。最后，本文敦促司法机构避免抽象诚信义务的概念，因为这一概念增加了世贸组织协定规定的义务。这将雅阁传统国际法对适用善意原则含义的理解。版权所有2005年，牛津大学出版社。
The purpose of the article is two-fold: first, it seeks to clarify and structure those contexts in which the principle of good faith has entered the WTO jurisprudence; and second, it presents an analysis of the potential effects and risks accompanying this entrance, such as the allegation of judicial activism on the part of the panels or the Appellate Body and the viability of a distinction between violation and non-violation cases. It attempts to define the framework within which a suitable concept for the application of good faith must be found and explores the conclusion that thus far the Appellate Body has applied good faith with the necessary caution. However, it cautions the necessity of avoiding an overbroad use of the concept and mandates the requirement for the judicial bodies to articulate more clearly the content attributed to the concept in a particular case and the legal consequences thereof than it has done thus far. Finally this article urges the judicial bodies to avoid the idea of an abstract obligation of good faith that adds something to the obligation under the WTO Agreements. This would accord with the traditional international law understanding of what the application of the good faith principle implies. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.