论国际投资法中的公平公正待遇

发布时间：2018-05-02 00:36

本文选题：公平公正待遇 + 稳定的法律和商业环境　；参考：《云南财经大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：本文首先在引言部分介绍了公平公正待遇(以下简称FET)引起关注的社会经济背景、政策背景以及仲裁实践背景,尔后对这一题目研究的理论以及实际意义进行分析,得出研究这一问题的必要性,最后在介绍完国内外研究现状的基础上,列举了笔者在写作中可能用到的实证研究、法解释学、比较研究以及历史研究的方法。文章第一部分主要是对公平公正待遇的概述,介绍了这一标准的起源、发展、现状,并且对现有的七种主要规定模式进行总结。同时在该章中,笔者还阐明了公平公正待遇的性质以及内涵,明确了公平公正待遇的独立性质以及否定了其“帝王条款”的性质。在本文第二部分中,笔者花费了大量的篇幅,根据国际投资争端解决中心(以下简称ICSID)的案例实践,结合自己的分析,确认了FET标准的五点内涵:合法期待;稳定和可预见的商业环境;透明度及正当程序;善意原则;免于胁迫和骚扰的自由。同时笔者否定了将遵守合同义务作为公平公正待遇的内涵要素。在第三部分中,笔者挑选了较新的、对于公平公正待遇分析较全面的AES Summit.AES Tisza v Hungary案以及以往的仲裁案例进行分析,主要包括案件情况简介、争论要点、仲裁庭分析、以及笔者对于该案的评述。同时笔者结合最新的Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v.Republic of Indonesia案以及Corona Materials LLC v Dominican Republic案,探讨了公平公正待遇在仲裁实践中胜诉率回落这一现象。在第四部分中,笔者首先结合我国的经济发展现状以及需求,确定了我国在国际投资仲裁中的立场(东道国立场)。尔后分析了我国在应对公平公正待遇在仲裁实践中频繁应用这一问题中的不足之处,具体包括:第一,公平公正待遇条款规定的太过模糊,条约中缺失关于其具体内容的描述;第二,不存在关于该标准的例外条款,不利于东道国政府根据社会经济情况采取适当措施,维护公共利益;第三,公平公正待遇条款的滥用,侵犯了缔约国的主权空间。最后,针对具体问题,笔者从实体和程序两个方面给出了建议措施,具体包括:在条约中明确公平公正待遇条款的内容,为仲裁员的自由裁量权划定界限、设定例外条款、在该条款下向投资者设定对应的义务这四条实体措施,以及完善投资仲裁上诉机制、完善仲裁员异议条款以及增加发展中国家学者在仲裁员名册中的数量、增加透明度、增设其他解决投资争议的程序共四条程序性建议。正文最后一部分是笔者对于自己观点以及全文论述内容的一个总结。再次阐明了公平公正待遇的五个具体内涵以及我国现阶段可以推进的具体措施。同时笔者强调了加强培养中国国际经济法学者的重要性,以及重视国际经济法研究的紧迫性。
[Abstract]:This paper first introduces the social and economic background, policy background and arbitration practice background of fair and just treatment (FET), then analyzes the theoretical and practical significance of the research on this topic. Finally, on the basis of introducing the current research situation at home and abroad, the author enumerates the methods of empirical research, legal hermeneutics, comparative study and historical research that the author may use in writing. The first part is an overview of fair and just treatment, introduces the origin, development, status quo of this standard, and summarizes the existing seven main regulation models. At the same time, in this chapter, the author clarifies the nature and connotation of fair and just treatment, clarifies the independent nature of fair and just treatment and negates the nature of "imperial clause". In the second part of this paper, the author spends a lot of space, according to the case practice of the International Center for the settlement of Investment disputes (ICSD), combined with his own analysis, confirmed the five connotations of the FET standard: legal expectation; A stable and predictable business environment; transparency and due process; principles of good faith; freedom from coercion and harassment. At the same time, the author denies the obligation to abide by the contract as the connotation of fair and just treatment. In the third part, the author selects a new, more comprehensive analysis of fair and just treatment of AES Summit.AES Tisza v Hungary cases and previous arbitration cases, mainly including a case profile, points of contention, analysis of the arbitral tribunal. And the author's comments on the case. At the same time, combining the latest Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v.Republic of Indonesia case and Corona Materials LLC v Dominican Republic case, the author probes into the phenomenon that fair and just treatment falls down in arbitration practice. In the fourth part, the author firstly defines our country's position in international investment arbitration (host country's position) according to the present situation and demand of our country's economic development. Then it analyzes the shortcomings of our country in dealing with the frequent application of fair and just treatment in the practice of arbitration, including: first, the provisions of fair and just treatment are too vague, and the treaty lacks the description of its specific content; Second, the absence of an exception to the standard is not conducive to the host Government taking appropriate measures to safeguard the public interest in the light of socio-economic conditions; thirdly, the abuse of the provision of fair and just treatment infringes upon the sovereign space of the State party. Finally, aiming at the specific problems, the author gives some suggestions from the aspects of substance and procedure, including: defining the content of the fair and just treatment clause in the treaty, delimiting the boundary for the arbitrators' discretion, setting the exception clause. The four substantive measures of creating corresponding obligations on investors under this provision, as well as improving the appeal mechanism for investment arbitration, perfecting the dissenting provisions of arbitrators and increasing the number of scholars from developing countries in the roster of arbitrators and increasing transparency, The addition of other investment dispute settlement procedures a total of four procedural recommendations. The last part of the text is a summary of the author's views and the content of the full text. It also expounds the five specific connotations of fair and just treatment and the specific measures that can be promoted at this stage in our country. At the same time, the author emphasizes the importance of strengthening the training of Chinese scholars of international economic law and the urgency of attaching importance to the study of international economic law.
【学位授予单位】：云南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D996.4

【相似文献】