论ICSID对“外国投资者”的法律界定

发布时间：2018-03-25 01:01

本文选题：ICSID　切入点：外国投资者　出处：《华东政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着外商投资以及对外投资活动的日益频繁,各国间利用国际仲裁机构解决争端的情形也逐渐增加。在这一背景下,“解决投资争端国际中心”(International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes,下称“ICSID”)的作用也在进一步加强。就ICSID而言,受理案件的前提是必须对案件拥有管辖权;而作为衡量是否具有管辖权的一个重要前提——“外国投资者”的范围,更是直接影响到案件的处理结果。一般而言,ICSID对外国投资者的定义主要体现在《解决国家与他国国民间投资争端公约》(Convention on Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States,下称《公约》)第25条中,即从自然人和法人两方面分别来谈ICSID的适用标准。但从目前的实践来看,现在的仲裁庭显然不满足仅从《公约》角度进行定义,而是更多地将国家间缔结的双边投资条约或者双边投资保护协定乃至多边投资协定中对投资者的定义引入裁决中,并将其作为判断外国投资者国籍的依据之一。这种扩大趋势已经逐步成为仲裁庭受案普遍适用的准则,也使得ICSID在无形中进一步伸展了裁决范围、扩张了管辖权。此外,对于一般国际法原理的适用也成为仲裁庭做出是否管辖决定的重要标准,例如“意思自治”理念在案件中的运用,就为ICSID的管辖模式打开了新的思路。首先,本文以ICSID对“外国投资者”的法律界定为着眼点,从ICSID的基本理论出发,结合各国对该管辖模式的适用情况,分析了满足ICSID管辖的“自然人投资者”所应当具备的要件。基于自然人投资者对于国籍所具有的天然依附性,在该部分中笔者着重强调了对国籍标准、国籍的时间要求以及国籍冲突时自然人投资者的身份认定,试图通过多角度的分析对自然人投资者的理解做一个较为全面的概括。其次,本文就“法人投资者”所涉及的有关问题做出了分析,该部分主要以法人的“国籍标准”与“外来控制标准”为主线展开,由于法人投资者的理解问题在实践中涉及了较多的案例,因此笔者试图通过归纳法的运用,以求从纷繁复杂的案件中总结出ICSID的整体观点和对于法人投资者定义的一般标准。再者,根据ICSID对双边投资条约、双边投资保护协定(Bilateral Investment Treaties,下称“BITs”)中投资者的定义,结合我国在对外缔结的BITs中对投资者的理解,本文着重阐述了“股东投资者”依据BITs的相关规定,作为独立的仲裁申请人提出请求的新模式。最后,本文以中国首例由ICSID受理的Mr. Taz Yap v. The Republic of Peru案(文中简称“蔡叶深案”)1为主题,展开有关中国与ICSID关系的分析;并对该案中仲裁庭对投资者的认定做出解读。通过本文的分析,笔者期待可以较为全面、深刻地探讨ICSID中与外国投资者的认定有关的问题,并且总结出ICSID在这一定义上的理论依据与适用标准,以求更好地为实践中可能出现的管辖权争议以及投资者身份争议提供依据。
[Abstract]:Along with the foreign investment and foreign investment activities have become increasingly frequent, between countries by international arbitration to resolve disputes also increased gradually. In this context, the International Center for settlement of investment disputes "(International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, referred to as" ICSID ") the effect is further enhanced. ICSID, the premise of the acceptance of the case is to have jurisdiction over the case; and as an important measure of whether it has jurisdiction over the range of" foreign investors ", is the processing results directly affect the case. In general, ICSID for foreign investors mainly solve the country and his definition of investment disputes between nations convention" in "(Convention on Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, hereinafter referred to as the" Convention ") in twenty-fifth, from the natural person and For the standard two corporate respectively to talk about ICSID. But judging from the current practice, the arbitration tribunal is apparently not satisfied only from the definition of "Convention", but more will be between countries concluded bilateral investment treaties or bilateral investment protection agreement and the multilateral agreement on investment of investors into the definition of the ruling, and as one of the foreign investors to judge nationality basis. This expanded trend has gradually become the arbitration tribunal case by universal standards, also makes the ICSID virtually extended the verdict, the expansion of the jurisdiction. In addition, the applicable principle of general international law has become an important standard to the jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal to make a decision. For example, the concept of "autonomy" in the case of the application, it opens a new way of thinking for the jurisdiction of ICSID.
First of all, based on the ICSID of the legal definition of "foreign investors" as the starting point, starting from the basic theory of ICSID, combined with the application of the national jurisdiction mode, analyses the elements to meet the ICSID under the jurisdiction of the "natural person investors" should have. Based on natural person investors for natural dependence of nationality in this part, the author emphasizes on nationality criteria, time requirements and identity conflict of nationality nationality when the natural person investor recognition, analysis attempts to multi angle understanding of natural person investors to make a more comprehensive summary. Secondly, this paper makes an analysis on the issues related to institutional investors involved this part is mainly to corporate, launched the "nationality" and "external control standards" as the main line, to understand the problems of institutional investors in practice involves many cases due to, Therefore, the author tries to use the inductive method, in order to summarize the overall view of ICSID and the general standard for the definition of institutional investors from the complicated cases. Furthermore, according to the ICSID of bilateral investment treaties, bilateral investment protection agreement (Bilateral Investment Treaties, hereinafter referred to as "BITs") in the definition of investors, combined with our understanding of investors in foreign made in BITs, this paper focuses on the "shareholders" according to the relevant provisions of BITs, put forward the new mode of the independent arbitration request as the applicant. Finally, the Mr. Taz Yap v. in the country's first The Republic of by ICSID accepted Peru case (referred to as "Cai Ye case") 1 as the theme, analyzes on the relationship between ICSID and Chinese; and in the case of the arbitration tribunal to make the interpretation of investors identified. Through this analysis, I look forward to a more comprehensive and deep This paper discusses the problems related to the identification of foreign investors in ICSID, and summarizes the theoretical basis and applicable standards of ICSID in this definition, in order to better provide a basis for disputes in the practice and investor identity disputes.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.4

【引证文献】