Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorĆirić, Aleksandar
dc.contributor.otherCvetković, Predrag
dc.contributor.otherVukadinović, Radovan
dc.creatorZdravković, Uroš I.
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-20T08:38:28Z
dc.date.available2018-12-20T08:38:28Z
dc.date.issued2018-06-27
dc.identifier.urihttp://eteze.ni.ac.rs/application/showtheses?thesesId=6334
dc.identifier.urihttps://fedorani.ni.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:1515/bdef:Content/download
dc.identifier.urihttp://vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?command=DISPLAY&base=70052&RID=534011798
dc.identifier.urihttp://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/123456789/10416
dc.descriptionThe aim of distributive justice is positive change of behavior of the WTO member which violates provisions of this Organization. That leads to the security and predictability of the multilateral trading system in the future. Violations of the WTO norms and principles which occur as a result of internal acts of certain WTO member, bring to the deprivation of legitimate expectation interest of other members. When that occurs, another WTO member may activate a mechanism for settlement of disputes through the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). The WTO dispute settlement system represents basic mechanism for implementation and protection of distributive justice. The most important task in implementation and protection of justice in the WTO lies on the DSU judicial bodies – panels, Appellate Body (AB) and arbitration, which, after conducted procedure, make reports concerning alleged violation of the WTO norms. The primary function of these reports is a correction of inconsistent measures through formulating recommendations to a WTO member to bring its law and practice in conformity with provisions of the WTO law. If respondent WTO member complies with recommendations, the benefit of such positive change behavior will be distributed to the all WTO community, and not just to a member which had interest to initiate procedure because of concrete impairment that it suffered. This represents manifestation of distributive justice. If respondent member fails to comply with recommendations, the complainant WTO member has several legal options, while the last resort which the DSU provides to the WTO member invoking the dispute settlement procedures is the possibility to retaliate, i.e. suspending the application of concessions or other obligations on a discriminatory basis vis-à-vis the other Member. In evaluating and criticizing the WTO dispute settlement system we have to consider all objective circumstances on which this system cannot influence. In these circumstances, it can be ascertained that this system is not ideal, nor can it ever become. Nevertheless, under today's constellations of international relations, for the WTO dispute settlement system may be concluded that it efficiently contributes to the implementation of distributive justice. Nevertheless, it can be also significantly improved in some segments.en
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languagesr
dc.publisherУниверзитет у Нишу, Правни факултетsr
dc.rightsAutorstvo-Nekomercijalno-Bez prerade 3.0 Srbija (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
dc.sourceУниверзитет у Нишуsr
dc.subjectSvetska trgovinska organizacijasr
dc.subjectWorld Trade Organizationen
dc.subjectDispute Settlementen
dc.subjectDistributive Justiceen
dc.subjectDispute Settlement Understandingen
dc.subjectrešavanje sporovasr
dc.subjectdistributivna pravdasr
dc.subjectDSU Sporazumsr
dc.titleOstvarivanje distributivne pravde u sistemu rešavanja sporova pred svetskom trgovinskom organizacijomsr
dc.typePhD thesis


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record