BITs中的ICSID管辖条款研究

发布时间：2018-10-05 13:10

【摘要】：国际投资领域的一项重要课题是关于国际投资争端的解决机制。这不仅是国际经济法层面上的一项重要课题,更是在国际投资实践中对投资者、投资者母国及东道国之间利益产生重要影响的重要议题。为了解决这个重要课题,加入《解决国家与他国国民之间投资争议公约公约》(以下称“《ICSID公约》”),将争议提交“解决投资争端国际中心”(以下简称ICSID)管辖成了越来越多投资者母国及国际投资主体的不二选择。另一方面,随着双边投资协定(Bilateral Investment Treaties, BITs)日渐广泛的被各国接受为调整国际投资关系的重要依据,众多BITs对于投资者与东道国之间因投资问题引发的争端解决机制也报以巨大的关注。鉴于ICSID在国际投资争端解决机制中的重要国际影响力,众多BITs都或多或少的对于投资争端的ICSID管辖权做出了约定。我国作为《ICSID公约》的成员国,也作为BITs的重要实践者,在与他国签订的BITs中也注重对于ICSID管辖权条款的约定。但是BITs中ICSID管辖权条款的约定如若不当,将极有可能在争端解决机制中令当时方陷入被动地位。从已有的国际实践中不难看到这一问题。本文以BITs中的ICSID管辖权为主要研究对象,以国际投资争议仲裁案例为基础,以我国签订的BITs相关内容为参照,重点关注我国与他国之间BITs中的ICSID管辖权约定,旨在为我国相关国际协定实践提供建设性意见。本文共分为四章,主要内容及分布为: 第一章BITs中的ICSID管辖条款概述。关注BITs中ICSID管辖权的基本内容和《ICSID公约》关于中心管辖权的基本规定。旨在对ICSID管辖的基本背景做以介绍。第二章东道国国内司法管辖权让位于ICSID的趋势。本部分首先关注经《ICSID公约》及相关国际投资争端解决实践,分析国际投资仲裁中的用尽当地救济原则变化趋势,得出用尽当地救济原则的逐渐淡化趋势;其次关注国际投资仲裁中的正当性危机,意在突出通过国际仲裁解决此类争端的不利趋势;再次,关注阿根廷的ICSID仲裁危机及应对措施,透视仲裁案例客观说明已有前车之鉴,突出问题的严重性和客观性。通过上述三主要个问题的阐述,表明东道国国内司法管辖权让位于ICSID的不利趋势,并突出将国际投资争端解决权利置于我国国内管辖的重要性。第三章中国BITs关于中心管辖权条款的实践及问题。本部分关注我国对外签订BITs中关于ICSID管辖权约定的态度变化,并结合相关BITs的具体约定,重点着眼于ICSID管辖权的同意条款、用尽当地救济原则、重大安全例外条款、最惠国待遇条款等,直观的分析我国BITs中的ICSID管辖权中可能存在风险。第四章关于我国BITs中ICSID管辖权条款的建议。针对前述我国与他国缔结的BITs,结合前述问题阐释,对完善我国BITs中的ICSID管辖权条款和以后的缔约实践提出了建议。
[Abstract]:An important subject in the field of international investment is the settlement mechanism of international investment disputes. This is not only an important topic on the level of international economic law, but also an important issue that has an important impact on the interests of investors, investor home countries and host countries in international investment practice. In order to solve this important issue, Accession to the Convention on the settlement of Investment disputes between States and Nationals of other States (hereinafter referred to as the "ICSID Convention"), the submission of disputes to the International Centre for the settlement of Investment disputes (hereinafter referred to as ICSID) has become the home country of more and more investors and The choice of the main body of international investment. On the other hand, with the growing acceptance of (Bilateral Investment Treaties, BITs) as an important basis for adjusting international investment relations, Many BITs also pay great attention to the dispute settlement mechanism between investor and host country. In view of the important international influence of ICSID in the international investment dispute settlement mechanism, many BITs have more or less made an agreement on the ICSID jurisdiction of investment dispute. As a member of ICSID Convention and an important practitioner of BITs, China also pays attention to the agreement on the jurisdiction clause of ICSID in the BITs signed with other countries. However, if the agreement of the ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs is improper, it is very likely that the then side will fall into a passive position in the dispute settlement mechanism. It is not difficult to see this problem from the existing international practice. This paper takes the jurisdiction of ICSID in BITs as the main research object, based on the case of international investment dispute arbitration, regards the relevant contents of BITs signed by our country as reference, and focuses on the agreement of ICSID jurisdiction in BITs between China and other countries. The purpose is to provide constructive advice for the practice of relevant international agreements in China. This paper is divided into four chapters. The main content and distribution are as follows: chapter 1: summary of ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs. This paper focuses on the basic contents of ICSID jurisdiction in BITs and the basic provisions of the ICSID Convention on central jurisdiction. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the basic background of ICSID jurisdiction. The second chapter is the trend that the domestic jurisdiction of host country gives way to ICSID. This part first pays attention to the practice of ICSID Convention and related international investment dispute settlement, analyzes the changing trend of the principle of exhaustion of local remedies in international investment arbitration, and concludes that the principle of exhaustion of local remedies is gradually desalinating; Secondly, focus on the legitimacy crisis in international investment arbitration, in order to highlight the adverse trend of resolving this kind of disputes through international arbitration; thirdly, pay attention to Argentina's ICSID arbitration crisis and countermeasures, perspective arbitration cases objectively explain the past, Highlight the seriousness and objectivity of the problem. Through the elaboration of the above three main problems, it shows that the domestic jurisdiction of the host country gives way to the unfavorable trend of ICSID, and highlights the importance of placing the right of international investment dispute settlement in the domestic jurisdiction of our country. The third chapter is about the practice and problems of the central jurisdiction clause in BITs of China. This part is concerned about the change of attitude about the ICSID jurisdiction agreement in the BITs signed by our country, and combined with the specific agreement of relevant BITs, focusing on the consent clause of ICSID jurisdiction, the principle of exhaustion of local remedies, the major security exception clause. Most-favoured-nation treatment clause, intuitively analyzes the possible risks in ICSID jurisdiction in China's BITs. The fourth chapter is about the suggestion of ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs of our country. In view of the BITs, concluded between China and other countries, this paper puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the ICSID jurisdiction clause in China's BITs and the subsequent contracting practice.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.4

【相似文献】