| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立交通大學 === 科技法律研究所 === 100 === The question of standarad of review has become one of most controversial aspects of the WTO dispute settlement jurisprudence. The concept of standard of review generally applies to all WTO disputes. When the examination of a domestic measures falls within the jurisdiction of panels and the Appellate Body, the question to what depth and with what intensity the WTO member determination should be reviewed arises.
Risk assessment is the core element of the Agreement on the Sanitary and Phytosnitary (SPS) Measure. When the measures at issue are not based on the relevant international standardsm guidelines or recommendations, the Agreemnt requires members shall ensure the measures are based on an assessment of the risks to human, animal or plant life or health. The standard of review applied by WTO panels and the Appellate Body in disputes under the SPS Agreement plays a critical role in determining to what extent the risk assement afforded by national authorities would be consistent with the SPS Agreement rules. However, there are few statements setting out positively the nature of the standard of review that is applied to risk assessments.
This thesis considers past six cases to study the tendency of the standard of review applied in SPS disputes. The study shows that the panels and Appellate Body tend to depend on the agreement obligation at issue and the categories of risks to determine the applied standard of review in disputes. This thesis argues that such distinction failed to find a strong ratioale basis. Therefore, the study concludes that it is more appropriate for the panels and Appellate Body to develope a single, more deferential standard of review for all SPS cases.
|
|---|
