论文部分内容阅读
WTO《反倾销协议》和各国反倾销法对于反倾销实践中的损害确定标准在大多数情况下所适用的都是第一条标准,即“实质性损害”标准;而对第二条标准“实质性损害威胁”标准却鲜有适用;至于第三条标准,即“实质性阻碍一国产业建立”的标准更是很少提及。但是,随着中国与其贸易伙伴间贸易摩擦的不断升级以及中国国内新兴产业的日益发展,无论是在中国出口产品遭遇的反倾销案件中,还是在中国国内产业对外提起诉讼的反倾销案件中,适用“实质性阻碍一国产业建立”标准的情况均不断发生。
The “anti-dumping agreement” of the WTO and the anti-dumping law of all countries are the first criteria for determining the damage in anti-dumping practice in most cases, that is, the criterion of “substantive damage”; while the second standard “ The criterion of ”substantive damage threat“ is seldom applicable. As for the third criterion, the criterion of ”substantially impeding the establishment of a country’s industry“ is seldom mentioned. However, with the continuous escalation of trade frictions between China and its trading partners and the growing development of new industries in China, both in anti-dumping cases encountered by China’s export products and anti-dumping cases in which China’s domestic industries filed legal proceedings against foreign countries, The situation of ”materially hindering the establishment of a country’s industry" has taken place continuously.