国际投资法中的间接征收若干法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-04 13:20

本文选题：间接征收 + 认定标准　；参考：《广西师范大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：间接征收问题从上世纪70年代以来,开始受到理论界和实务界的关注。但是由于当前的间接征收理论和实践并不完善,如各国、各仲裁庭对于间接征收的含义、如何判定间接征收等都有着不同的理解,从而导致间接征收争端成为当前国际投资争端的“高产区”。笔者欲通过本文,探讨间接征收的几个主要法律问题。本文除引言及结语外共分四章。第一章主要介绍了间接征收的概念及其构成要件。间接征收是从征收发展而来,第一节主要阐述了征收的含义以及与征收相类似的国有化的含义,并比较了征收和国有化的关系；第二节主要内容是间接征收问题的源起、间接征收的含义以及间接征收与征收的关系,其中对间接征收的含义从学界、国际条约、国际投资协定等方面进行了详细的论述；第三节分析了间接征收的构成要件,其主要包括：主观上要有保护公共利益的目的；符合可以适用的国内法和法律程序；遵循非歧视性原则；应当给予补偿；行为造成了投资者利益受损。第一章是对间接征收问题一个总体上的把握。第二章主要阐述了间接征收认定方法的分析。目前的理论界和实务界把间接征收的认定方法主要分为三种,即纯粹效果标准,目的标准,效果与目的兼顾标准。本章从三种标准的概念入手,通过国际法实践中的一些具体案例,讨论其是如何适用,并且对各种标准进行客观的评价。通过对比,笔者认为,效果与目的兼顾标准是最为合理的认定方法。在这三种标准外,本章还论述了判定间接征收的两个辅助标准：比例原则和三要素原则,并对如何运用上述原则认定间接征收做出分析。第三章主要介绍了间接征收的五种争端解决机制,即伊美求偿庭、ICSID. NAFTA、MIGA、欧洲人权法院。在对五种机制作出简单介绍后,通过案例分析等方法对五种有关间接征收的争端解决机制做出了深度的分析,并且比较五者的不同,得出笔者的观点。笔者认为ICSID是解决间接征收争端最合适的机制,并对此进行分析。第四章主要介绍了我国有关间接征收法律。第一节根据我国投资现状,点明我国目前面临的两大风险：作为投资者东道国被诉间接征收的风险和我国的海外投资被东道国征收的风险,通过相关的数据和案例佐证。第二节是我国有关间接征收的立法,国内法上关于间接征收的立法不多,主要是在我国同他国缔结的双边投资条约或其他协定中。其中重点介绍了中印BIT中有关间接征收的规定。第三节是笔者提出的我国应当如何应对当前的间接征收情况,包括明确国内法中公共利益的界定；投资协定中对间接征收做出具体的定义以及谨慎的对待ICSID管辖权。
[Abstract]:Since the 70s of last century, the issue of indirect expropriation has attracted the attention of both the theoretical and practical circles. However, because the current indirect collection theory and practice are not perfect, such as countries, the arbitral tribunals have different explanations for the meaning of the indirect expropriation and how to determine the indirect expropriation, which leads to the indirect levying dispute as the current international. The author wants to discuss several major legal issues of indirect expropriation through this article.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into four chapters.
The first chapter mainly introduces the concept of indirect expropriation and its constituent elements. The first section mainly expounds the meaning of expropriation and the meaning of nationalization, and compares the relationship between expropriation and nationalization. The second section is mainly about the origin of the problem of indirect expropriation and the indirect levying of it. The meaning and the relation of indirect expropriation and expropriation are discussed in detail from the academic circles, international treaties and international investment agreements, and the third section analyses the elements of indirect expropriation, which mainly include: subjectively, the purpose of protecting the public interests; conforming to the applicable domestic law and legal process Order; follow the principle of non discrimination; compensation should be given; investors' interests will be impaired by behavior. The first chapter is a general grasp of indirect expropriation.
The second chapter mainly expounds the analysis of the method of identification of indirect expropriation. The current theoretical and practical circles mainly divide the methods of identification of indirect expropriation into three kinds, namely, the standard of pure effect, the standard of purpose, the effect and the purpose of the standard. This chapter starts with the concept of three standards, and discusses it as a result of some specific cases in the practice of international law. What is applicable and objectively appraise all kinds of standards. By contrast, I think that the criterion of both effect and purpose is the most reasonable method of identification. In addition to these three standards, this chapter also discusses two auxiliary criteria for determining Indirect Expropriation: the principle of proportion and the original of the three elements, and the indirect expropriation of how to use the above principles. Make an analysis.
The third chapter mainly introduces five kinds of dispute settlement mechanism of indirect expropriation, namely, the imimation court, ICSID. NAFTA, MIGA, the European Court of human rights. After a brief introduction to the five mechanisms, the paper makes a deep analysis of the five kinds of dispute settlement mechanism of indirect expropriation through case analysis and so on, and compares the differences between the five, and draws a pen. The author thinks that ICSID is the most appropriate mechanism to solve the indirect expropriation dispute and analyze it.
The fourth chapter mainly introduces the indirect expropriation law in our country. The first section, according to the current situation of our country's investment, points out the two risks that China is facing at present: the risk of the indirect expropriation of the investor's host country and the risk imposed by the host country on the overseas investment of our country, and through the related data and cases. The second section is the state of our country. There is not much legislation on indirect expropriation in domestic law, mainly in bilateral investment treaties or other agreements that China has concluded with other countries. The emphasis is on the provisions on indirect expropriation in China and India in BIT. The third section is the author's suggestion that our country should deal with the current situation of indirect expropriation, including clear domestic law. The definition of the public interest; the specific definition of indirect expropriation in the investment agreement and the prudent treatment of ICSID jurisdiction.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996.4

【参考文献】