检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:贺辉 马迁[2] HE Hui;MA Qian(Nankai University, Tianjin 300350;Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan 450001)
机构地区:[1]南开大学,天津300350 [2]郑州大学,河南郑州450001
出 处:《河南司法警官职业学院学报》2018年第3期69-74,共6页Journal of Henan Judicial Police Vocational College
摘 要:随着海峡两岸相继加入WTO,双方的经贸往来更加正常化,经贸纠纷也大量涌现。用传统的争端解决方式还是WTO争端解决机制解决两岸经贸纠纷成了人们关注的焦点。两岸经贸争端解决需立足于两岸经贸争端解决的现状以及存在的问题。虽然海峡两岸签署了ECFA,但是具体实施方案囿于目前两岸政治关系的不稳定性等原因,经贸争端解决机制仍缺乏可操作性。正因为海峡两岸争端解决的不确定性,有必要探讨适用WTO争端解决机制适用的可能性。With the both sides of the Taiwan Strait joining the WTO , the bilateral economic and trade contacts have become more normalized and the trade and economic disputes between the both sides also emerge in large numbers . It becomes the focus that which is better to solve the disputes of cross-strait economic and trade between the traditional dispute settlement method or the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism. The settlement of cross-strait economic and trade disputes needs to be based on the status quo and existing problems of cross-strait economic and trade dispute settlement. Although the two sides of the strait have signed the ECFA but the specific implementation plan is hampered by the current instability of cross-strait political relations, the economic and trade dispute settlement mechanism still lacks operability. It is precisely because of the uncertainty of the settlement of disputes between the two sides of the strait that it is necessary to explore the possibility of applying the WTO dispute settlement.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30