Analysis Of The Criterion Of The Recognition Of Market Disruption In Case US-Tyres

The case named United States-Measures affecting imports of certain passengervehicle and light truck tyres from China is the first case under the transitionalproduct-specific safeguard mechanism in paragraph16of the protocol. Althoughthere have been lots of essays talking about the theory of the transitionalproduct-specific safeguard mechanism, it’s still worthy for analyzing theinterpretation of certain articles of the protocol by the panel or the appellatebody in this real case. It will give us some useful suggestions regarding thepanel or the appellate body’s particular perspective with respect to thespecific articles contained in the protocol. This is really helpful to us forprotecting our rights under the current protocol as much as we can. This thesisis mainly based on the appellate body report. This thesis is mainly talking aboutthe opinion of the appellate body on the criterion of recognition of marketdisruption which contained in the appellate body report rather than analyzingthe criterion of recognition of market disruption theoretically. We are goingto talk about the criterion of recognition of market disruption which causedthe application of the transitional product-specific safeguard measures onlyin this thesis. We are not going to talk about the significant diversions oftrade which caused the application of the transitional product-specific safeguard measures in this thesis. This thesis is comprised of5chapters exceptfor the introduction and the closing.Chapter1is about the introduction of the definition of transitionalproduct-specific safeguard mechanism. It also compared the transitionalproduct-specific safeguard mechanism with safeguard measures and article19ofGATT1994in this chapter.Chapter2is about the introduction of the origin and the development ofthe term market disruption. Through analyzation we will find the essence of theintroduction of this term is to protect the domestic industry, no matter inwhatever forms it takes on. It also can provide us with a background for betterunderstanding the introduction of the transitional product-specific safeguardmechanism.Chapter3is about the interpretation of article16of the protocol. Itintroduces how the panel or the appellate body will interpret a particular clausein a real case.Chapter4is about the conclusion on the criterion of recognition of marketdisruption drawn from the appellate body’s report. It includes the recognitionof increasing rapidly, recognition of causation, recognition of significantcause and correlation between increasing rapidly and material injury in thecourse of the recognition of causation.Chapter5is about the lessons we draw from the appellate body’s report.It will help us to find the attitude of the appellate body toward theinterpretation of particular articles contained in the protocol. So we can getsome practical suggestions in the real case, it is helpful to us for betterprotecting our legal rights under current protocol as much as we can in thefuture.