Africa in the First Decade of WTO Dispute Settlement

African countries have largely been absent as players at theWTO dispute settlement system in its first decade. In recentliterature, this has been attributed to a number of factors,among them, the low volume of trade with an export base oftencharacterized by single unprocessed commodities, a complicatedand expensive dispute settlement system, inadequate legal expertiseand a less litigious approach to possible disputes particularlywhen major trading and donor partners are involved. By showinghow and to what extent African countries have participated inGATT and WTO disputes, as well as in the DSU review negotiationsand other related processes, the present article argues thatthis weak participation by large sections of the WTO membershipis a danger to the long-term "predictability" function of theWTO, and could undermine the usefulness of the entire processeventually. It closes with various proposals on how the problemmay be addressed.     

The Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference: A Grassroots Alternative for Resolving High‐Conflict Parenting Disputes in Lean Times

This article describes a court‐connected alternative dispute resolution program, the Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference. The key feature of this program is the participation of two volunteer panelists, one a family law attorney and the other a mental health professional experienced in parenting disputes, who assist the judicial officer in working with the parties and their attorneys (if any) to reach a resolution of their parenting dispute. Significantly, in addition to addressing the parties’ legal issues, the panelists also address the parties’ psychological and emotional issues relevant to the dispute on an as‐needed basis. Findings from six years of experience with the program are discussed, including evidence of high satisfaction with the program, a high rate of settlement, a decrease in relitigation, and a concomitant savings of scarce judicial resources.     

Book Review: How Mediation Works: Theory,Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg,Jeanne M. Brett,Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur,With Nancy H. Rogers

This is a book review of How Mediation Works: Theory, Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg, Jeanne M. Brett, Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur, with Nancy H. Rogers. How Mediation Works is intended for a wide range of audiences: practicing mediators; aspiring mediators; those who may refer cases to mediation; participants in mediation, including parties and attorneys; managers who facilitate disputes; and those interested in mediation without a specific plan to engage in the practice (who the authors call “mediation learners”). The book is a well‐written, thoughtful, easy‐to‐read, organized, and concise overview of mediation practice. The book is divided into six chapters: (1) conflicts, disputes, and their resolution; (2) dispute resolution processes; (3) the roles of the mediator and the disputing parties at each step of the mediation process; (4) dealing with difficulties; (5) mediation and the law; and (6) suggestions for aspiring mediators. Though not an authority for family law mediation, the book provides many insightful observations and suggestions that would be instructive and helpful to any mediator or individual with an interest in mediation.     

How Dispute Resolution System Design Matters: An Organizational Analysis of Dispute Resolution Structures and Consumer Lemon Laws

This study demonstrates how the structure of dispute resolution shapes the extent to which managerial and business values influence the meaning and implementation of consumer protection law, and consequently, the extent to which repeat players are advantaged. My analysis draws from, links, and contributes to two literatures that examine the relationship between organizational governance structures and law: neo‐institutional studies of law and organizations and socio‐legal studies of repeat players' advantages in disputing. Specifically, I compare an instance where powerful state consumer protection laws are resolved in private dispute resolution forums funded by automobile manufacturers but operated by independent third‐party organizations (California) with one where consumer disputes are resolved in public alternative dispute resolution processes run and administered by the state (Vermont). Through in‐depth interviews and participant observation in the training programs that dispute resolution arbitrators undergo in each state, I show how different dispute resolution structures operating in California and Vermont give different meanings to substantially similar lemon laws. Although my data do not allow me to establish a causal relationship, they strongly suggest that the form of the dispute resolution structure, and how business and state actors construct the meaning of lemon laws through these structures, have critical implications for the effectiveness of consumer protection laws for consumers.     

从纠纷到审判利用的过程分析——兼论权利意识和诉讼意识的关系

通过界定权利意识和诉讼意识的概念，指出纠纷发生后，当事人为谋求纠纷的实质性解决，倾向于援引规范作为他们说服的根据，从而使纠纷衍化权利纠纷，权利纠纷使当事人具备权利意识。此．后当事人经过对成本的权衡，并得到国家诉讼政策的允许，选择进行诉讼，将权利意识转化为诉讼意识。结论认为，诉讼意识范畴小于权利意识范畴，具有权利意识的纠纷当事者并不必然选择诉讼作为其权利实现的手段。因此，国家所要做的，就是为当事人之间适于通过审判解决的纠纷提供便利，使其接近司法、接近正义。     

Negotiation, Power in Conciliation, and Review of Compensation Claims

Workers Compensation claims are not interpersonal disputes. Almost always they are disputes between individuals and corporations. Compensation insurers are "repeat players" in the system. Workers are often "one–shotters" who have little or infrequent contact with the system. Power inequality between the worker, employer, insurer, and those who are required to facilitate negotiations and resolve and settle disputes under compensation legislation are matters of considerable importance. This paper examines the effects of the implementation, in 1993, of informal dispute resolution processes in the Western Australian workers compensation system under the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981(WA), which excluded lawyers from the process. It argues that preexisting power imbalances have been aggravated by these procedural changes, and in particular, by the exclusion of legal practitioners from the dispute resolution process. The issues raised herein have general application to most workers compensation systems.     

民事诉讼解纷机制中蕴含的正义

冲突的本质在于当事人利益的对抗,外化为双方意志的对抗。程序的纷争,可以通过纠纷主体选择合意或接受第三方或一方的决定方式解决。两种解纷方式契合了一定的正义理论,体现了个体私益、公共利益在诉讼程序中的运行。在具体的民事诉讼程序中,两种方式并不是完全区分开来的,在相当多的情况下,纠纷的解决需要两种方式的综合运用。     

论刑事和解与民间规范

刑事和解,是我国正在倡导和试验的一种刑事纠纷解决方式。刑事和解的核心问题是处理加害人和受害人之间的权利义务关系。究竟根据什么规范处理、分配刑事和解中当事人的权利义务问题,是刑事和解的重要前提。民间规范如果一旦获得刑事和解主持人、当事人在行为上的遵从、接受和心理上的确信、认同,则可以被援引为刑事和解中当事人权利义务分配的根据。不同类型的民间规范,具有不同模式的权利义务配置方式,但这都不影响在刑事和解中对当事人的权利义务分配。国家有关刑事和解正式制度的建立,应关注民间规范的参与,关注对民间规范的吸纳。     

Litigation and the timing of settlement: evidence from commercial disputes

Although an overwhelming proportion of all legal disputes end in settlement, the determinants of the timing of settlement remain empirically underexplored. We draw on a novel dataset on the duration of commercial disputes in Slovenia to study how the timing of settlement is shaped by the stages and features of the litigation process. Using competing risk regression analysis, we find that events such as court-annexed mediation and the first court session, which enable the disputing parties to refine their respective expectations about the case outcome, in general reduce case duration to settlement. The magnitude of the respective effects, however, varies with time. Completion of subsequent court sessions, in contrast, does not affect the time to settlement. Judicial workload affects the timing of settlement indirectly, via the effect on the timing of the first court session. We also examine the effect of other case and party characteristics.     

试论WTO争端解决机构的法律解释权

根据WTO的规定,部长会议和总理事会拥有对WTO协定和多边贸易协议进行解释的专有权力;而专家组与上诉机构也可以在解决具体争端过程对WTO涵盖协议进行解释。作为争端解决报告的一部分,专家组与上诉机构的法律解释对争端当事方具有约束力。但由于WTO不存在严格的"遵循先例"原则,因此争端解决机构在特定案件中作出的法律解释在法律上也不具有先例效力;然而却具有事实上的先例效果。由于争端解决报告在事实上的先例效力,引发了关于争端解决机构"造法"的问题,有必要采取措施防止争端解决机构超越权限进行法律解释。     

Third Party Participation in Investment-Environment Disputes: Recent Developments

This article outlines recent developments in investor–State dispute settlement related to the participation of third parties in arbitration. A particular focus is given to third party participation in disputes with a clear public interest based on the relevance of the cases to the protection of the environment, or sustainable development more generally. The benefits and drawbacks of third party participation and the relationship of participation to broader issues of transparency are also briefly discussed.     

A Social Interactionist Approach to the Victim-Offender Overlap

A social interactionist perspective suggests that violent offenders are frequently victims of violence because of the way they behave, and the way third parties behave during verbal disputes that lead to escalation. We examine to what extent violent offenders are more likely to be victimized because they tend to engage in provocative actions, are less likely to engage in remedial actions, and more likely to be intoxicated, and because third-parties have a greater tendency to encourage aggressive behaviors during disputes involving offenders. Analyses are based on an original situational-level survey of male inmates and men in the community about characteristics of their verbal and violent interpersonal disputes. We examined the extent to which various dispute-related behaviors and third-party actions mediated the relationship between offending and two study outcomes: whether the dispute became violent and whether the antagonist was victimized. Using two measures of violent offender status, we find that violent actors are more likely to engage in verbal aggression during disputes, are less likely to engage in remedial actions, and are more likely to be intoxicated. Third parties are more likely to be present during the disputes of offenders and they tend to encourage escalation. Combined, these situational processes mediate a substantial portion of the relationship between offending and violent victimization. The findings indicate the victim-offender overlap is partly due to the behaviors of offenders and third parties during disputes that significantly increase the risk of conflict escalation.     

DEPENDENCY MEDIATION

Dependency mediation has emerged as a new field for resolving disputes involving child protection disputes. Program guidelines concerning issues of referral to mediation; compliance with time standards; confidentiality; court review of agreements; participation of the parties, participants, and counsel; and program evaluation are discussed. Training and qualification issues for dependency mediators are reviewed. Recommendations are made regarding the future of dependency mediation.     

非政府组织与世界贸易组织争端解决机制

本文叙述了非政府组织作为“法庭之友”参与WTO争端解决机制的理论与实践及其纷争,对此作了较为深入的价值分析和理论阐释,进而提出了解决这一问题的可能思路、制度设计和情境设置,并指出了其对于国际经济法理论与实践发展趋势的意义蕴涵。本文认为,“法庭之友”问题表明WTO争端解决机制必须谋求外交方法与司法方法的平衡,尤其应该确认争端解决机制的司法独立和自由裁量,并应从多重视域中谋求一种多元互动的解决之道。     

The Forest for the Trees: A Roadmap to Canada's Litigation Experience in Lumber IV

The ongoing feud over the export of Canadian softwood lumberto the US is likely one of the most litigated trade disputesin history. In April 2001, the fourth round of the lumber disputecommenced. The ensuing five-and-a-half years featured a numberof cases being filed before panels constituted under the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization(WTO), as well as, for the first time, US domestic courts. Duringthe summer of 2006, as with the two rounds of the dispute immediatelybefore it, Canada and the US negotiated a settlement. This articlepresents a broad overview of the softwood lumber dispute andexamines what was accomplished in the Lumber IV litigation.It explores the decisions rendered by NAFTA and WTO panels,as well as the historic foray by Canadian parties into the UScourts. It also analyses lessons learned from the softwood lumberlitigation, and the potential applicability of these lessonsto other complex trade disputes.     

The Good Case: Decisions to Litigate at the World Trade Organization

This article draws upon the law-in-action, repeat players, and motive to understand how legal actors construct the "good case" in dispute settlement systems. The construction of "good cases" is examined at the World Trade Organization (WTO), a relatively new and unexplored site for the study of dispute settlement. Findings show that the good case encompasses flexible sets of motives including economic, political, and symbolic characteristics of trade grievances to mobilize WTO law. The flexibility is due to uncertainties associated with litigation, which are manifestations of four features of the WTO: the newness of the system, the organizational and legal structure of the dispute system, the context of the WTO as an intergovernmental agreement, and the persistence of inequality between states. Six variations of the good case are identified.     

WTO disputes settlement

How to understand China’s policies and practices on the WTO dispute settlement since its accession to WTO and conduct objective and reasonable assessment on its performance and achievements in WTO dispute settlement is currently an important issue of concerns. By analyzing China’s performance in the WTO dispute settlement in the broad environment of the WTO dispute settlement activities over the past thirteen years, this paper holds that the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has made remarkable achievements over the past 13 years, strongly promoted the trade relationship of the WTO members and settled tough and complicated trade disputes in a timely, effective and proper manner; and over the past seven years after China’s accession to WTO, China’s practice in WTO dispute settlement mechanism has rendered the following initial impression: High-profile positive policies and low-profile moderate acts; not hesitate to file complaints but be good at responding to complaints in participating in the WTO dispute settlement activities; more consultations should be made with less litigations; diligent in participation and strict in implementation; and handling trade disputes related to the WTO rules in a reasonable, effective and moderate manner.     

The devil is in the details: How arbitration system design and training facilitate and inhibit repeat-player advantages in private and state-run arbitration hearings

This article demonstrates that arbitration system design and the training that arbitrators receive shape the extent to which repeat players gain advantages in arbitration hearings. While prior arbitration research does suggest that arbitrator training matters, this is the first article to show how it matters, as we observe actual arbitration hearings in private and state-run arbitration systems in two states. Our comparative analysis links three literatures interested in how seemingly interest-neutral institutions, like disputing forums, serve in practice to reinforce dominant norms, values, and hierarchies: (1) sociolegal studies of repeat-player advantages in disputing, (2) studies of occupational socialization in educational settings, and (3) neoinstitutional organizational sociology studies of how managerial values influence the way in which organizations construct law. We bridge these literatures by showing how arbitrator system design and the occupational socialization that arbitrators receive in private arbitration are primary mechanisms through which managerial values influence the arbitration process, ultimately providing a pathway for repeat-player advantages in hearings. Because our analysis compares two distinct arbitration systems, we identify variation in these processes and offer preliminary but tangible policy recommendations for the design and implementation of arbitration systems that best protect civil and consumer rights within arbitral forums that the Supreme Court continually upholds.     

从美国启动201条款谈保障措施制度

美国于 2 0 0 2年 3月启动 2 0 1条款 ,对进口钢铁采取保障措施。包括中国、欧盟、日本等国及利益方在内的各国对此均作出了反应 ,各有关国纷纷要求与美国磋商 ,并向世贸组织申诉 ,有些国家还拉出了报复清单。此案是中国加入世贸组织后第一次利用世贸规则来解决贸易争端 ,具有重要的意义。     

论WTO体系下农业补贴的特殊安排及未来展望

与WTO《补贴协定》及GATT1994相比,在总体规范方法、概念、规则结构、救济等方面,《农业协定》采取了一套独特的规制方式,但在WTO农业补贴争端中,《补贴协定》、GATT1994与《农业协定》常被共同适用于农业补贴。此举强化了对农业补贴的规制,但农业补贴是否,以及在多大程度上继续享有特殊地位和待遇,最终应由成员谈判确定。在未来一段时期内,特殊的农业补贴规则将继续存在,我国在参与WTO农业谈判、诉讼,调整国内农业政策时,应给予充分重视。