双边投资争端解决中的最惠国条款适用研究

发布时间：2018-05-30 16:08

本文选题：最惠国条款 + 双边投资　；参考：《西南政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：在通常情况下,最惠国条款适用于实体问题。近年来,有些外国投资者为了启动规定在第三方条约中的投资争端解决机制,却试图将最惠国条款扩大适用于投资争端解决事项。同时,在国际投资仲裁实践中,也已经出现了这种情况。在种情形下,讨论最惠国条款能否适用于双边投资争端解决事项以及我国应采取的应对措施,就有着十分重要的现实意义。本文运用历史分析方法对“最惠国条款”的背景和发展历史进行追溯,并采用实证分析方法,通过对相关案例的分析,提出本文关于最惠国条款能否适用于双边投资争端解决事项的看法。最后,为我国应对国际新形势提出对策。本文包含四个部分: 第一部分,最惠国条款简述。本部分简要介绍了最惠国条款的发展历史、定义、适用条件以及适用例外。第二部分,最惠国条款适用于投资争端解决的实践。长时间以来,在国际投资条约的缔约实践中,大多数国家均只规定最惠国条款通常适用于实体性问题,而对于其能否适用于程序性问题则未明确规定。导致这一争议问题的出现,主要是由于国际投资条约对最惠国条款的适用范围措辞模糊。本部分主要介绍目前Maffezini案前后ICSID仲裁庭在不同的案例中对投资争端解决事项是否可以援引最惠国条款的态度,并对其中持赞成与反对观点的典型案例进行详细分析。第三部分,厘清我国最惠国条款的现状,并分析其潜在的影响。第四部分,应对措施。本部分从我国双边投资条约的角度出发,着重探讨我国应如何应对最惠国条款被扩大适用于双边投资争端解决事项。
[Abstract]:In general, the MFN clause applies to substantive issues. In recent years, some foreign investors have tried to extend the MFN clause to investment dispute settlement in order to initiate the investment dispute settlement mechanism stipulated in the third party treaty. At the same time, in the practice of international investment arbitration, there has been such a situation. Under such circumstances, it is of great practical significance to discuss whether the most-favoured-nation clause can be applied to bilateral investment dispute settlement and the countermeasures that China should take. This paper uses the historical analysis method to trace back the background and development history of the most-favoured-nation clause, and adopts the empirical analysis method, through the analysis of the relevant cases. This paper puts forward some views on whether the most-favoured-nation clause can be applied to bilateral investment dispute settlement. Finally, for our country to respond to the new international situation put forward countermeasures. This article consists of four parts: The first part is a brief description of the MFN clause. This part briefly introduces the development history, definition, applicable condition and application exception of MFN clause. The second part, the most-favoured-nation clause applies to the practice of investment dispute settlement. For a long time, in the practice of concluding international investment treaties, most countries have only stipulated that MFN clauses are usually applicable to substantive issues, but there is no clear provision as to whether they can be applied to procedural issues. This controversial issue is mainly due to the vague wording of the scope of application of MFN clauses in international investment treaties. This part mainly introduces the attitude of the ICSID arbitration tribunal in different cases before and after the Maffezini case on whether the most-favoured-nation clause can be invoked in the settlement of investment disputes, and makes a detailed analysis of the typical cases in which the pros and cons hold the view of the most-favoured-nation clause. The third part, clarify the current situation of MFN clause in China, and analyze its potential impact. The fourth part, countermeasures. This part focuses on how to deal with the extension of MFN clauses to bilateral investment dispute settlement from the point of view of bilateral investment treaties (bits).
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.4

【相似文献】