由于RTA的蓬勃发展，WTO与RTA之间的管辖权冲突越来越严重。条约解释方法和一般国际法原则以及RTA的场所选择条款在解决WTO与RTA管辖权冲突方面有一定的作用，但存在局限性，在WTO协定缺乏相关规定之际，上述方法可以作为权宜之计。但如果要从根本上解决两者管辖权的冲突，应修改WTO协定，向WTO专家组或上诉机构提供WTO争端解决程序中的场所选择条款。该修正案确保专家组或上诉机构在WTO协定中具有法律依据，以适用场所选择条款来解决WTO与RTA之间的管辖权冲突。
在WTO争端解决程序中有两种方法可以提供场所选择条款。一种方法是在WTO协定中增加一个新条款。该条款将允许专家组或其上诉机构适用特定RTA的场所选择条款，以解决WTO与RTA之间的管辖权冲突，作为争议各方自己选择的适当争端解决场所的证据。另一种方法是直接规定WTO协定的“选择性排他管辖条款”。根据这一条款，WTO专家组或上诉机构将不得不依赖这一“选择性排他管辖条款”来解决WTO与RTA之间的管辖权冲突，因为该条款已经成为专家组或上诉机构的条约义务。因此，这种方法将从根本上解决WTO与RTA之间的管辖权冲突。
【注释】
[1]N'Gunu N.Tiny:Judicial Accommodation:NAFTA，the EU and the WTO，Jean Monnet Working Paper，2005:5.http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/05/050401.pdf.
[2]William J.Davey，AndréSapir:The Soft Drinks Case:the WTO and Regional Agreements，World Trade Review，2009，8(1):16.
[3]NAFTA Final Report of the Panel，In The Matter of the U.S.Safeguard Action Taken on Broom Corn Brooms from Mexico，USA-97-2008-01(Jan.30.1998).
[4]N'Gunu N.Tiny:Judicial Accommodation:NAFTA，the EU and the WTO，Jean Monnet Working Paper，2005:25.http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/05/050401.pdf.
[5]Ian Brownlie:Principles of Public International Law，Oxford University Press，2008:608.
[6]Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge University Press，2007:6.
[7]Ian Brownlie:Principles of Public International Law，Oxford University Press，2008:607.
[8]王毅:《WTO争端解决中的法律解释》，载《法学研究》2009年第5期，第63页。
[9]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:37.
[10]Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge University Press，2007:238.
[11]Ian Brownlie:Principles of Public International Law，Oxford University Press，2008:634.
[12]Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge University Press，2007:243.
[13]有学者主张应严格解释，参见Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge University Press，2007:228.也有学者主张应宽松解释，参见L.D.Guruswamy，B.R.Hendricks:International Environmental Law in a Nutshell，West Publishing，1997:28.
[14]Wolfrum和Matz教授认为，《维也纳条约法公约》第30条不是被成文化的国际习惯法。Rüdiger Wolfrum，Nele Matz:Conflicts in International Environmental Law，International Environmental Agreements:Politics，Law and Economics，2007，7(3):306.持相反见解的有Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge University Press，2007:228.
[15]Black's Law Dictionary's definition，“The principle that a later statute negates the effect of a prior one if the later statute expressly repeals，or is obviously repugnant to，the earlier law”，2009.
[16]Report of the Panel，Indonesia-Measures Affecting the Automotive Sector，WT/DS54/R，adopted July 23，1998.
[17]Wolfrum和Matz教授认为，在缔约国不完全相同的多边协议下，后法优于前法概念并不适合用以解决条约适用关系。Rüdiger Wolfrum，Nele Matz:Conflicts in International Environmental Law，International Environmental Agreements:Politics，Law and Economics，2007，7(3):308.
[18]Jenks教授对仅以时间为决定要素而让条约的缔结时间先后作为条约适用持反对态度。C.W.Jenks:The Conflict of Law Making Treaties，BRIT.Y.B.INT'L L.，1953，30:405.
[19]于敏友、陈喜峰:《论解决WTO法内部冲突的司法解释原则(上)》，载《法学评论》2002年第5期，第84页。
[20]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:385.
[21]Case Concerning the Gabcikovo—Nagymaros Project(Hungary v.Slovakia)，1997 ICJ Report，para.132.
[22]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:387.
[23]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:389.
[24]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:398.
[25]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:390.
[26]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:290.
[27]Report of the Appellate Body，European Communities-Regime for the Importation，Sale and Distribution of Bananas，WT/DS27/AB/R，adopted 9 September 1997，para.204；Report of the Panel，European Communities-Trade Description of Sardines，WT/DS231/R，adopted 29 May 2002，para.7.15～7.19.
[28]Report of the Panel，Indonesia-Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry，WT/DS54/R，adopted 2 July1998，para.14.63.
[29]David Palmeter，Petros C.Mavroidis:Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization:Practice and Procedure，Cambridge University Press，2004:82.
[30]姜作利:《诚信原则在WTO争端解决机制中的适用评析》，载《现代法学》2010年第1期，第109页。
[31]Jeff Waincymer:WTO litigation:procedural aspects of formal dispute settlement，Cameron May，2002:498.
[32]举例而言，《维也纳条约法公约》第26条的条约必须遵守原则和《联合国宪章》第2条第2项规定，即包含了以最大善意遵守缔约国所签订条约的概念；此外，《维也纳条约法公约》第18条，条约签署国于条约生效前应避免从事违背条约宗旨和目的的行为，也是对签署国以最大善意遵循所签订条约的要求。
[33]郑斌:《国际法院与法庭适用的一般法律原则》，韩秀丽、蔡从燕译，法律出版社2012年版，第116～117页。
[34]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000，WT/DS217/AB/R，adopted 16 January 2003，para.298.
[35]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000，WT/DS217/AB/R，adopted 16 January 2003，para.297.
[36]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS54/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.36.
[37]于丹翎:《WTO争端解决机构中善意原则的适用及其意义》，载《外交评论》2009年第1期，第138页。
[38]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products，WT/DS58/AB/R，adopted 12 October 1998，para.158.
[39]Report of the Panel，United States-Sections 301—310 of the Trade Act1974，para.7.68.
[40]Julia Ya Qin:Managing Conflicts Between Rulings of WTO and RTA Tribunals:Reflections on the Brazil-Tyres Case，(Wayne State Univ.L.Sch.Legal Studies Research Paper Series No.p.18.2009).http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract＿id＝1490035(访问时间2018年4月12日).
[41]Michael Lennard:Navigating by the stars:Interpreting the WTO Agreements，Journal of International Economic Law，2002，5(1):17.
[42]陈立虎、周敏:《非WTO法在WTO争端解决中的适用》，载《当代法学》2006年第3期，第76页。
[43]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products，WT/DS58/AB/R，adopted 12 October 1998，para.130.
[44]Report of the Panel，European Communities-Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products，WT/DS291/R，adopted 29 Sept.2006.
[45]Benn McGrady:Fragmentation of International Law or“Systemic Integration”of Treaty Regimes:EC-Biotech Products and the Proper Interpretation of Article 31(3)(c)of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties，World Trade，2008，42(4):591.
[46]Report of the Panel，European Communities-Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products，WT/DS291/R，adopted 29 Sept.2006，para.7.68.
[47]Gabrielle Marceau:WTO Dispute Settlement and Human Rights，EUR.J.INT'L L，2002，13(4):781.
[48]Report of the Appellate Body，Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages，WT/DS8/AB/R，adopted 4 October 1996，para.34.
[49]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline，WT/DS2/AB/R，adopted 20 May1996，para.16.
[50]蔡莉妍:《论区域贸易协定和WTO协定的法律竞合》，载《沈阳大学学报》(社会科学版)2014年第4期，第505页。
[51]Report of the Appellate Body，EC-Trade Description on Sardines，WT/DS231/AB/R，adopted 26 Sept.2002，para.278.
[52]陈良刚:《试析反倾销司法审查的几个基本问题》，载《法律适用》2008年第8期，第50页；赵骏、韩小安:《WTO法治和中国法治的砥砺与互动》，载《浙江大学学报》(人文社会科学版)2011年第5期，第152页。
[53]Article 14.16 of Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and and the Republic of Korea.
[54]周忠海:《论国际法在WTO体制中的作用》，载《政法论坛》2002年第4期，第7页。
[55]许楚敬:《国际公法在WTO争端解决中的作用与应用》，载《现代法学》2010年第6期，第125页。
[56]禁止反言原则和诚信原则违反的差异在于此原则的适用，一国的行为无须是出于恶意(bad faith)，参见T.W.Bowett:Estoppel Before International Trivunals and its Relation to Acquiescence，BRIT.Y.B.INT'L L，1957，33:176.
[57]Jeff Waincymer:WTO litigation:procedural aspects of formal dispute settlement，Cameron May，2002:505.
[58]T.W.Bowett:Estoppel Before International Trivunals and its Relation to Acquiescence，BRIT.Y.B.INT'L L，1957，33:176.
[59]Legal Status of Eastern Greenland(Den.v.Nor.)，1933 P.C.I.J.(ser.A/B)No.53，p.22(Apr.15).
[60]Legal Status of Eastern Greenland(Den.v.Nor.)，1933 P.C.I.J.(ser.A/B)No.53，p.71(Apr.15).
[61]Legal Status of Eastern Greenland(Den.v.Nor.)，1933 P.C.I.J.(ser.A/B)No.53，p.73(Apr.15).
[62]Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear(Cambodia v.Thailand)，1962 ICJ Report 6，pp.143-144.
[63]T.W.Bowett:Estoppel Before International Trivunals and its Relation to Acquiescence，BRIT.Y.B.INT'L L，1957，33:202.
[64]GATT Report of the Panel，EEC-Member States'Import Regimes for Bananas，DS38/R，11 February1994，para.361～363.Waincymer教授认为，禁止反言原则在WTO的适用尚不明确，参见Jeff Waincymer:WTO litigation:procedural aspects of formal dispute settlement，Cameron May，2002:507.
[65]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.17.
[66]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Anti-Dumping Investigation of High-Fructose Corn Syrup(HFCS)from the United States，WT/DS132/R，adopted 28 January 2000，para.75.
[67]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”，WT/DS108/AB/R，adopted 20 March 2000，para.133.
[68]GATT Report of the Panel，United States-Measures Affecting Imports of Softwood Lumber from Canada，SCM/162，adopted 27 October 1993，para.308.
[69]Thomas Cottier，Krista N.Schefer:Non-Violation Complaints in the WTO/GATT Dispute Settlement:Past，Present and Future//Petersmann(ed.):International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System，Kluwer Law International，1997:177.
[70]Report of the Panel，Guatemala-Definitive Anti-Dumping Measure on Grey Port-land Cement from Mexico，WT/DS156/R，adopted 24 October 2000，paras.8.23—8.24.
[71]T.W.Bowett:Estoppel Before International Trivunals and its Relation to Acquiescence，BRIT.Y.B.INT'L L，1957，33:76.
[72]GATT Report of the Panel，EEC-Member States'Import Regimes for Bananas，DS38/R，11 February1994，para.361.
[73]Jeff Waincymer:WTO litigation:procedural aspects of formal dispute settlement，Cameron May，2002:510.
[74]Jeff Waincymer:WTO litigation:procedural aspects of formal dispute settlement，Cameron May，2002:519.
[75]尤瓦·沙尼:《国际法院与法庭的竞合管辖权》，韩秀丽译，法律出版社2012年版，第313页。
[76]Report of the Appellate Body，Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages，WT/DS8/AB/R，adopted 4 October 1996，para.14；Report of the Appellate Body，United States—Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”，WT/DS108/AB/R，adopted 24 February 2000，para.108；Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products，WT/DS58/AB/R，adopted 12 October 1998，para.97；Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000，WT/DS217/AB/R，adopted 16 January 2003，para.7.57.
[77]Vaughan Lowe:Res Judicata and the Rule of Law in International Arbitration，AFRICAN J.INT'L L，1996，8:39.
[78]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/AB/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.30.
[79]Reinisch:The Use and Limits of Res Judicata and Lis Pendens as Procedural Tools to Avoid Conflicting Dispute Settlement Outcomes，The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals，2004，3(1):65.
[80]参见《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款:“WTO争端解决机制在为多边贸易机制提供可靠性和可预测性方面是一个重要因素。各成员认识到该机制适于保护各成员在适用协定项下的权利和义务，及依照解释国际公法的惯例澄清这些协定的现有规定。争端解决机构的建议和裁决不能增加或减少适用协定所规定的权利和义务”。
[81]Report of the Appellate Body，Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages，WT/DS8/AB/R，adopted 4 October 1996，para.34.
[82]Report of the Panel，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308//R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.13.
[83]Report of the Panel，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308//R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.18.
[84]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.53.
[85]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.53.
[86]John Ragosta et al:WTO Dispute Settlement:the System is Flawed and Must be Fixed，37 INT'L L，2003，37(3):750～751.
[87]左海聪:《WTO专家组和上诉机构可适用的法律》，载《法学评论》2005年第5期，第73页。(www.xing528.com)
[88]徐崇利:《从规则到判例:世贸组织法律体制的定位》，载《厦门大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2002年第2期，第48页。
[89]William J.Davey:Dispute Settlement in the WTO and RTAs:A Comment，in Lorand Bartels，Federico Ortino(eds):Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System，Oxford University Press，2006:343.
[90]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:98.
[91]Kyung Kwak，Gabrielle Marceau:Overlaps and Conflicts of Jurisdiction between the World Trade Organization and Regional Trade Agreements，in Lorand Bartels，Federico Ortino(eds):Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System，Oxford University Press，2006:476.
[92]William J.Davey，AndréSapir:The Soft Drinks Case:the WTO and Regional Agreements，WORLD TRADE REV.，2009，8(5):16.
[93]Sieber:Legal Orderin a Global World，in A.von Bogdandy，R.Wolfrum，(eds):Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law，2010:33-34.http://www.mpil.de/en/pub/publications/periodic-publications/max-planck-yearbook/Vol.ume-14.cfm(访问时间2018年3月12日)。
[94]《联合国海洋法公约》第311条第3款:“本公约两个或两个以上缔约国可订立仅在各该国相互关系上适用的、修改或暂停适用本公约的规定的协定，但须这种协定不涉及本公约中某项规定，如对该规定予以减损就与公约的目的及宗旨的有效执行不相符合，而且这种协定不应影响本公约所载各项基本原则的适用，同时这种协定的规定不影响其他缔约国根据本公约享有其权利和履行其义务。”
[95]Agreement on the Establishment of A Free Trade Area between the Government of Israel and the Government of the United States of America，U.S.-Isr.，art.19.1.f，Apr.22，1985.
[96]《中国与东盟全面经济合作框架协议争端解决机制协议》第2条第6款:“涉及本协议项下或者争端当事方均是缔约方的其他条约项下具体权利或义务的争端，若本协定项下或其他条约项下的争端解决程序已经启动，起诉方所选择的争端解决场所应排除其他争端解决场所对该争端的适用。”
[97]参见《关于争端解决的规则与程序谅解》第1条、第7条、第23条和附件1。
[98]纪文华、黄萃:《WTO与FTA争端解决管辖权的竞合与协调》，载《法学》2006年第7期，第41页。
[99]Jennifer Hillman:Conflicts Between Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO—What Should the WTO do?，CORNELL INT'L L.J，2009，42(2):202；Caroline Henckels:Overcoming Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO—FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO，EUR.J.INT'L L，2008，19(3):584；Karen Alter，Sophie Meunier:Nested and Overlapping Regimes in the Transatlantic Banana Trade Dispute，J.EUR.PUB.POL'Y，2006，13(3):362；Joost Pauwelyn:Going Global，Regional，or Both?Dispute Settlement in the Southern African Development Community(SADC)and Overlaps with the WTO and Other Jurisdictions，MINN.J.GLOBAL TRADE，2004，1(13):295.
[100]Songling Yang:The Key Role of the WTO in Settling its Jurisdictional Conflicts with RTAs，CHINESE J.INT'L L，2012，11(2):305.
[101]Sungjoon Cho:Breaking the Barrier between Regionalism and Multilateralism:A New Perspective on Trade Regionalism，HARV.INT'L L.J，2001，42:452；Zakir Hafez，Weak Discipline:GATT Article XXIV and the Emerging WTO Jurisprudence on RTAs，N.D.L.REV，2003，79:879.
[102]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:94.
[103]Gabrielle Marceau，A Call for Coherence in International Law:Praises for the Prohibition Against‘Clinical Isolation'in WTO Dispute Settlement，Journal of World Trade，1999，33(5):115.
[104]Christian Leathley:An Institutional Hierarchy to Combat The Fragmentation of International law:Has The ILC Missed An Opportunity?，N.Y.U.J.INT'L L.＆POL，2007，40:262～263.
[105]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:22；Michael Akehurst:The Hierarchy of the Sources of International Law，BRITISH YEAR BOOK OF INT'L L，1975，47(1):274.
[106]Dinah Shelton:Normative Hierarchy in International Law，AM.J.INT'L L，2006，100(2):291.
[107]John K.Setear:Responses to Breach of A Treaty and Rationalist International Relations Theory:the Rules of Release and Remediation in the Law of Treaties and the Law of State Responsibility，VIRGINIA LAW Review，1997，83(1):203.
[108]Michael Akehurst:The Hierarchy of the Sources of International Law，BRITISH YEAR BOOK OF INT'L L，1975，47(1):273.
[109]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:95.
[110]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:95.
[111]许楚敬:《非WTO法在WTO争端解决中的运用》，社会科学文献出版社2012年版，第242页。
[112]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:327.
[113]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:147.
[114]Juliana Murray:Assessing Allegations:Judicial Evaluation of Testimonial Evidence in International Tribunals，CHI.J.INT'L L，2010，10(2):771.
[115]John McGinnis:The Appropriate Hierarchy of Global Multilateralism and Customary International Law:The Example of the WTO，VA.J.INT'L L，2003，44:229，239.
[116]Right of Passage over Indian Territory(Port.v.India)，1960 I.C.J.44，233(Apr.12).
[117]Bin Cheng:General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals，Cambridge University Press，2006:394.
[118]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:129.
[119]Southern Bluefin Tuna(Austl.and N.Z.v.Japan):Award of Jurisdiction and Admissibility，2000，4:54.http://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/Vol.＿XXIII/1-57.pdf(访问时间2017年10月27日)。
[120]August Reinisch:The Use and Limits of Res Judicata and Lis Pendens as Procedural Tools to Avoid Conflicting Dispute Settlement Outcomes，LAW PRAC.INT'L CTS.＆TRIB，2004，3(1):71.
[121]Agreement on the Establishment of a Free Trade Area between the Government of Israel and the Government of the United States of America，Aug.19，1985.
[122]Joost Pauwelyn，Luiz Salles:Forum Shopping Before International Tribunals:(Real)Concerns，(Im)Possible Solutions，CORNELL INT'L L.J，2009，42(77):91.
[123]Martin Dixon:Textbook on International Law，Oxford University Press，2005:16.
[124]Andrew Guzman:The Consent Problemin International Law，Berkeley Program in Law and Economics(2011)Working Paper Series，p.2.
[125]Andrew Guzman:The Consent Problemin International Law，Berkeley Program in Law and Economics(2011)Working Paper Series，p.4.
[126]Matthew Lister:The Legitimating Role of Consent in International Law，Chicago Journal of International Law，2011，11(2):691.
[127]Martin Dixon:Textbook on International Law，Oxford University Press，2005:16.
[128]参见《维也纳条约法公约》第2条第1款a项。
[129]Anthony Aust:Modern Treaty Law and Practice，Cambridge university press，2007:94.
[130]Report of the Panel，United States-Measures Concerning the Importation，Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products，WT/DS381/R，adopted 15 September 2011.
[131]Press Release，Office of the United States Trade Representative，United States Initiates NAFTA Dispute with Mexico over Mexico's Failure to Move Its Tuna-Dolphin Dispute from the WTO to the NAFTA(Nov.2009).http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/november/united-statesinitiates-nafta-dispute-mexico-over(访问时间2017年12月26日)。
[132]Report of the Panel，United States-Measures Concerning the Importation，Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products，WT/DS381/R，adopted 15 September 2011，para.4.71.
[133]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Measures Concerning the Importation，Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products，WT/DS381/AB/R，adopted 16 May 2012，para.402.
[134]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.17.
[135]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.29.
[136]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.21.
[137]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.52.
[138]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.21.
[139]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R.，adopted 6 March 2006，para.52.
[140]Joost Pauwelyn:The Role of Public International Law in the WTO:How Far Can We Go?AM.J.INT'L L，2001，95(3):535.
[141]Report of the Appellate Body，India-Patent Protection for Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Chemical Products，WT/DS50/AB/R，adopted19 December 1997，para.92.
[142]Joel B.Trachtman:Book Review:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law by Joost Pauwelyn，98 AM.J.INT'L L，2004，98(4):858.
[143]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:460.
[144]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:353.
[145]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:353.
[146]Report of the Appellate Body，European Communities-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products(Hormones)，WT/DS26/AB/R，adopted 16 January1998，para.156.
[147]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.37.
[148]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.37.
[149]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.38.
[150]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.51.
[151]史晓丽:《区域贸易协定争端解决机制中的“场所选择条款”探析》，载《政法论坛》2008年第2期，第110页。
[152]Henry Gao，Chin Leng Lim:Saving the WTO from the Risk of Irrelevance:The WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism as a‘Common Good'for RTA Disputes，J.INT'L ECON.L，2008，11(4):908.
[153]Dinah Shelton:Normative Hierarchy in International Law，AM.J.INT'L L，2006，100(2):321.
[154]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:136.
[155]Burns H.Weston，Richard A.Falk，Hilary Charlesworth，Andrew L.Strauss:International Law and World Order:A Problem Oriented Coursebook，West Academic Publishing，1990:76～77.
[156]参见《维也纳条约法公约》第38条:“第34条至第37条之规定不妨碍条约所载规则成为对第三国有拘束力之公认国际法习惯规则。”
[157]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.37.
[158]Nancy Kontou:The Termination and Revision of Treaties in the Light of New Customary International Law，Clarendon Press，1995:146.
[159]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline，WT/DS2/AB/R，adopted 29 April1996，para.17.
[160]Antonio Cassese:International Law，Oxford University Press，2001:119.
[161]Baron Arnold Duncan McNair:The Law of Treaties，Clarendon Press，1961:64.
[162]Oscar Schachter:Entangled Treaty and Custom，in Yoram Dinsten(eds):International Law at a Time of Perplexity:Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne，Springer Netherlands，1989:720.
[163]Oscar Schachter:Entangled Treaty and Custom，in Yoram Dinsten(eds):International Law at a Time of Perplexity:Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne，Springer Netherlands，1989:32.
[164]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:134.
[165]Joost Pauwelyn:Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to other Rules of International Law，Cambridge University Press，2003:134.
[166]Wolfke Karol:Custom in Present International Law，Springer Netherlands，1993:93.
[167]Jennifer Hillman:Conflicts Between Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO—What Should the WTO do?，CORNELL INT'L L.J，2009，42(2):205.
[168]North American Free Trade Agreement，U.S.-Can.-Mex.，Dec.17，1992，32I.L.M.289(1993)at art.2005.6.
[169]Report of the Appellate Body，United States-Anti-Dumping Act of1916，WT/DS136/AB/R，adopted 28 August 2000，para.54.
[170]Report of the Panel，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/R，adopted 7 October 2005，para.7.18.
[171]Report of the Appellate Body，Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages，WT/DS308/AB/R，adopted 6 March 2006，para.51.
[172]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.17.
[173]Report of the Panel，Argentina-Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on Poultry from Brazil，WT/DS241/R，adopted 22 April 2003，para.7.17.
[174]Jennifer Hillman:Conflicts Between Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO—What Should the WTO do?，CORNELL INT'L L.J，2009，42(2):202.
[175]Report of the Panel，Brazil-Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres，WT/DS332/R adopted 12 June 2007，para.7.35.
[176]Report of the Panel，Brazil-Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres，WT/DS332/R adopted 12 June 2007，para.7.348.
免责声明：以上内容源自网络，版权归原作者所有，如有侵犯您的原创版权请告知，我们将尽快删除相关内容。
