論跨國爭端解決機制之設計與選擇—以澳洲菸草素面包裝法爭端案件為核心

The Design and Selection of International Dispute Settlement Mechanisms: A Case Study of Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Act

盧思薇(Si-Wei Lu)

指導教授 ： 林勤富

國立清華大學/科技管理學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2017年)

摘要

2011年，澳洲依菸草素面框架公約頒布菸草素面包裝法時，恐怕難以想像此部捍衛全球公共衛生之法律，竟涉及國際貿易與投資體系等法律義務違反，就此引爆多重跨國爭端。此起跨國爭端，反映跨國爭端解決機制擴增之諸多問題。有鑒於國際法默許跨國爭端解決機制之管轄權重疊，將可能產生矛盾裁判之碎裂化國際法疑慮；同時，跨國爭端解決機制擴增後，大幅提升當事方擇定不當機制之成本與風險。然而，既有文獻似乎尚未建構檢驗與選擇跨國爭端解決機制之制度，以致當前之機制漏洞可能不被察覺，當事方亦難以依機制功能尋覓合於需求之機制。為處理跨國爭端解決機制擴增所引致問題，本文欲以國際組織機構設計理論與選購法庭之觀點，構思跨國爭端解決機制設計暨選擇理論。此理論將拆解機制解決爭端所需之核心要素，並呈現採取各種機制對當事方之成本與效益。為檢驗此理論之適用性，本文將以澳洲菸草素面包裝法爭端案件為核心，先以爭端解決機制選擇理論為當事方分析可採機制有利於解決爭端之程度，再回歸至跨國爭端解決機制設計理論，分析本案牽涉之三大公約體系，如何改善其爭端解決機制設計。最後，本文試圖超脫當事方之利益考量，針對規範衝突與矛盾裁判衍生之國際法碎裂問題，提出調和之道。藉由跨國爭端解決機制設計與選擇理論，本文期待改善因跨國爭端解決機制擴增所致之國際法碎裂、跨國爭端解決之機制選擇，以及跨國爭端解決機制設計之三大問題。

關鍵字

全球化 ； 跨國爭端解決 ； 選購法庭 ； 菸草素面包裝法 ； FCTC

並列摘要

The case of Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Act (TPPA) concerns a number of legal issues as to TPPA’s compatibility with the World Health Organization (WHO) Agreement on Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), and Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Hong Kong for the Promotion and Protection of Investments. This case is of extraordinary importance under the international legal framework with respect to problems resulted from the proliferation of international dispute settlement mechanisms. Similarly, it sheds light on issues regarding the selection and design of international courts. The existing literature primarily focuses on forum shopping before domestic courts, leaving out an equally important, yet less explored issue—forming shopping before international dispute mechanisms. In this Article, the author therefore presents a design and selection theory of international dispute settlement mechanisms. Moreover, the author seeks to apply this theory to the case of Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Act, discussing the costs and benefits of using international trade, international investment, international health, and domestic court’s dispute settlement mechanisms, and specifically analyzing each regime’s design flaws. With a focus on the relationship between the increased international tribunals and transnational disputes with legal tricky issues, this article proposes “a rational design and selection of dispute settlement mechanisms” approach as a possible solution for the unsettled issues under the international framework.

並列關鍵字

globalization ； international dispute settlement ； forum shopping ； Tobacco Plain Packaging Act ； FCTC

參考文獻

5. 林彩瑜（2014），〈國際投資仲裁程序與公共衛生之關聯：以菸品控制爭端為例〉，《臺大法學論叢》，43卷3期，頁550-85。

7. 經濟部智慧財產局（2007），《TRIPS逐條釋義》，台北經濟部智慧財產局。

1. Alvarez, José (2005), International Organizations as Law-Makers.

2. Brown, Chester (2009), A Common Law of International Adjudication.

3. Collier, John & Vaughan Lowe (2000), The Settlement of Dispute in International Law.