国际投资协定争议仲裁研究
摘要
国际投资争议中较为复杂和难于处理的是东道国政府与外国私人投资者之间的争议,国际上通常所指或关注的投资争议即是这类争议,东道国与外国私人投资者之间的争议既包括东道国与投资者之间基于投资合同而发生的争议,又包括基于国际投资协定而发生的争议。
二十世纪90年代以来国际投资协定数量激增导致由国际投资协定引发的投资争议急剧增加。而晚近东道国通过国际投资协定同意国际投资仲裁管辖权的作法的流行,使得投资者利用国际投资协定中的投资者-国家仲裁条款发动国际投资协定争议仲裁蔚然成风。与一般的仲裁不同,东道国与投资者之间的国际投资协定争议仲裁机制具有一定的特殊性。同时在晚近国际投资协定争议仲裁实践中出现了一些新的争议点,仲裁庭对相关投资规则的解释,在很大程度上影响着国际投资法规则的发展。因此本论文以国际私人投资者与东道国之间因双边投资保护协定争议或区域性的多边投资保护协定争议而提起的仲裁为主要研究对象,以国际投资协定争议仲裁案例为基础,以东道国与投资者之间的国际投资协定争议为主线,关注投资者-国家仲裁纠纷中的管辖权争议和主要实体争议焦点问题处理的分歧和动向,剖析国际投资协定争议仲裁对国际投资领域中一些投资规则及国际投资仲裁制度新发展的影响,并从我国既是发展中国家中最大的资本输入国又是重要的资本输出国的现状,对我国的国际投资条约实践提出参考意见,力求获得对我国国家利益、国家主权维护和对我国海外投资保护的双赢。
论文全文分为五章,包括以下内容:
第一章国际投资协定争议仲裁基本理论,首先从国际投资协定的性质、种类、核心内容对国际投资协定进行界定,其次对国际投资协定争议进行界定,分析国际投资协定争议的形式、解决方式、法律关系、争议的基本内容,确定论文的研究基点是投资者-东道国间依投资协定的仲裁,并进一步界定国际投资协定争议仲裁的性质为国际法意义上的国际混合仲裁。在本章中指出论文的主要研究内容,搭建了论文的主体框架。
第二章到第五章探讨国际投资协定争议仲裁中的主要程序问题和晚近的实体争议焦点。
第二章分析国际投资协定争议仲裁中的管辖权问题。首先介绍国际投资协定争议仲裁的管辖机构;其次分别就ICSID、ICC、UNCITRAL特设仲裁庭等主要管辖机构的管辖条件和管辖权确定、运作特点进行分析;再次就争议性质、可适用的国际投资协定之存在及仲裁合意分析仲裁管辖的依据,说明国际投资协定争议仲裁的基础是国际法;最后针对仲裁实践中的管辖权异议,归纳说明主要的管辖权争议问题,主要通过案例评述国际投资协定争议仲裁对适格投资者国籍的界定、对投资定义的发展;分析国际投资协定争议仲裁中的当地救济规则,着重说明当地救济与终局性要求、与“岔路口条款”的解释适用关系;分析国际投资仲裁中最惠国待遇扩张适用于程序事项之争议;论证中外双边投资协定争议仲裁管辖权的相关问题,提出完善建议。
第三章主要从国际投资争议仲裁的特殊性分析国际投资协定争议仲裁程序法和国际投资协定争议仲裁实体法。重点在于对各个仲裁管辖机构在仲裁法律适用上的比较,说明仲裁地法律、国际投资协定规则、国内法在不同仲裁机构实践中的地位或作用的不同,并从其法律适用上回应说明国际投资协定争议仲裁的性质为国际法意义上的国际混合仲裁。
第四章关注晚近国际投资协定争议仲裁中的实体争议焦点问题。首先介绍评价国际投资协定仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准问题,从分析公正与公平待遇标准的起源开始,对公正与公平待遇标准含义的理论分歧和作用进行评析。进而分析公正与公平待遇标准在仲裁实践中的适用,探讨公正与公平待遇标准适用中的焦点问题,介绍并评析公正与公平待遇标准的新发展,并分析中外双边投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准规定存在的问题。其次对国际投资协定争议仲裁中间接征收问题进行探讨。结合仲裁案例分析国际投资协定争议从直接征收的争议到间接征收争议的发展,说明国际投资协定争议仲裁中征收问题的新动向,分析中外双边投资协定中的征收条款。
第五章国际投资协定争议仲裁的监督与执行程序中,结合投资仲裁案例,分析国际投资协定争议仲裁裁决的撤销机制,并对国际投资仲裁上诉机制的可行性进行论证。在仲裁裁决的承认与执行上,重点说明ICSID仲裁裁决的效力及承认与执行,同时结合《纽约公约》说明ICSID外仲裁裁决的承认与执行。
The international investment disputes between foreign private investors and the host country are more complicated and difficult to deal with. This kind of investment disputes not only include disputes based on the investment contract between them, but also include those based on international investment treaties.
Dramatic increasing of investment treaties since the 90's Twenty century, the investment disputes on investment treaties have expanded. In recent years with the prevalence of offer to international investment arbitration of the host States in investment agreements, investors tend to bring international investment arbitration with investors-State arbitration clause of investment agreements to settle the dispute upon them. The investors-State Arbitration in investment treaties has some special characters different from the general Arbitration. International arbitration in investment treaty is the arbitration mainly in disputes between foreign investors and the host state due to BIT or regional investment protection agreement.
At the same time, in recent practice of international arbitration in investment treaty, some new dispute issues have appeared. To a large extent, the development of international investment rules has been impacted with the tribunals' interpretation of the related investment rules. This paper, with the cases of international investment dispute arbitration, with the investment treaty disputes between investors and the host State, is paying attention to the differences and trends of the settlement of the jurisdiction disputes and substantive disputes, analyzing the new development of some investment rules and arbitration mechanism in international investment treaty dispute arbitration practice.
As the biggest capital-importing country in the developing countries and an important capital-exporting country, China should seek to safeguard China's sovereignty and public interests and protect China's overseas investment. Some suggestions on formulation of China's investment treaty is put forward.
This paper is divided into five chapters, as the following:
Chapter I is the basic theory of the International Arbitration in investment treaty. Firstly, to define the international investment treaty with its nature, the types and the core content. Secondly, to analyze the forms, the legal relationship and the settlement of the disputes arising from international investment treaties. Thirdly, to determine the foreign private investors - the host country arbitration in accordance with investment treaties is the threshold of this paper, and to define the international arbitration in investment treaty and to argue that the international arbitration in investment treaties belong to the international mixed arbitration is treaty-based arbitration mechanism. It has its international law nature. Finally, to point out that the main content of the paper and set up it's main framework in this chapter.
It is to analyze the major procedural issues and the focus disputes in recent years of the international arbitration in investment treaty in Chapter II to Chapter V.
In Chapter II the jurisdiction of the international arbitration in investment treaty is to be analyzed. Firstly, to analyze the jurisdictional conditions and the operational characteristics of the ICSID, ICC, UNCITRAL and other ad hoc arbitral tribunal. summarize the main questions on the jurisdiction. Secondly, to explain the jurisdiction of the international arbitration in investment treaty is based on international law. The legal bases are the issued international investment treaty, "Washington Convention" and the arbitration agreement between the two parties of the arbitration. At the last, to review the cases of international arbitration in investment treaties about the nationality of investors and the definition of invest; analyze the exhaustion of local remedies rule, decrypt the relationship between the local remedies and finality requirements, the relationship between the local remedies and the "fork in the road clause"; analyze the expansion of MFN to procedural matters in international investment arbitration; demonstrate the related issues in BITs between China and foreign country, put forward a sound proposal.
In Chapter III, the specificity of the application of the law in international investment arbitration to be analyzed. Focus on comparing the applicable law and arbitration law in ICSID arbitration and out ICSID arbitration, and demonstrating the nature of investment treaty arbitration to be the mixed arbitration in international law lever.
In Chapter IV, analyzing the most talked issues in today's international investment dispute settlement practice. The first to introduce the origin of the fair and equitable treatment standard, then to analyze the theoretical differences of its meaning and its role, and further to discuss the perform of the standard and to explore the new development of the standard, and to analyze the defect in the fair and equitable treatment standard provisions in BITs between China and foreign country. The second to discuss the indirect expropriation problem in international investment arbitration. With studying the related cases, to introduce the development from direct collection to indirect expropriation, to define the norms of indirect expropriation, to descript the influence of investment arbitration practice on the development of the issued rules, and the last to analyze the indirect expropriation provision in BITs between China and foreign country.
Chapter V is on the mechanisms of the supervision and enforcement of the award of international investment arbitration. At first to analyze the revocation of the ruling mechanism on the investment arbitration cases, and to demonstrate the feasibility of the appeal mechanism in international investment arbitration, to discuss its latest reform and development. Next to focuse on the effectiveness of ICSID arbitral awards and the recognition and enforcement of them. At the same time to discuss the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral awards outside ICSID with "New York Convention".
二十世纪90年代以来国际投资协定数量激增导致由国际投资协定引发的投资争议急剧增加。而晚近东道国通过国际投资协定同意国际投资仲裁管辖权的作法的流行,使得投资者利用国际投资协定中的投资者-国家仲裁条款发动国际投资协定争议仲裁蔚然成风。与一般的仲裁不同,东道国与投资者之间的国际投资协定争议仲裁机制具有一定的特殊性。同时在晚近国际投资协定争议仲裁实践中出现了一些新的争议点,仲裁庭对相关投资规则的解释,在很大程度上影响着国际投资法规则的发展。因此本论文以国际私人投资者与东道国之间因双边投资保护协定争议或区域性的多边投资保护协定争议而提起的仲裁为主要研究对象,以国际投资协定争议仲裁案例为基础,以东道国与投资者之间的国际投资协定争议为主线,关注投资者-国家仲裁纠纷中的管辖权争议和主要实体争议焦点问题处理的分歧和动向,剖析国际投资协定争议仲裁对国际投资领域中一些投资规则及国际投资仲裁制度新发展的影响,并从我国既是发展中国家中最大的资本输入国又是重要的资本输出国的现状,对我国的国际投资条约实践提出参考意见,力求获得对我国国家利益、国家主权维护和对我国海外投资保护的双赢。
论文全文分为五章,包括以下内容:
第一章国际投资协定争议仲裁基本理论,首先从国际投资协定的性质、种类、核心内容对国际投资协定进行界定,其次对国际投资协定争议进行界定,分析国际投资协定争议的形式、解决方式、法律关系、争议的基本内容,确定论文的研究基点是投资者-东道国间依投资协定的仲裁,并进一步界定国际投资协定争议仲裁的性质为国际法意义上的国际混合仲裁。在本章中指出论文的主要研究内容,搭建了论文的主体框架。
第二章到第五章探讨国际投资协定争议仲裁中的主要程序问题和晚近的实体争议焦点。
第二章分析国际投资协定争议仲裁中的管辖权问题。首先介绍国际投资协定争议仲裁的管辖机构;其次分别就ICSID、ICC、UNCITRAL特设仲裁庭等主要管辖机构的管辖条件和管辖权确定、运作特点进行分析;再次就争议性质、可适用的国际投资协定之存在及仲裁合意分析仲裁管辖的依据,说明国际投资协定争议仲裁的基础是国际法;最后针对仲裁实践中的管辖权异议,归纳说明主要的管辖权争议问题,主要通过案例评述国际投资协定争议仲裁对适格投资者国籍的界定、对投资定义的发展;分析国际投资协定争议仲裁中的当地救济规则,着重说明当地救济与终局性要求、与“岔路口条款”的解释适用关系;分析国际投资仲裁中最惠国待遇扩张适用于程序事项之争议;论证中外双边投资协定争议仲裁管辖权的相关问题,提出完善建议。
第三章主要从国际投资争议仲裁的特殊性分析国际投资协定争议仲裁程序法和国际投资协定争议仲裁实体法。重点在于对各个仲裁管辖机构在仲裁法律适用上的比较,说明仲裁地法律、国际投资协定规则、国内法在不同仲裁机构实践中的地位或作用的不同,并从其法律适用上回应说明国际投资协定争议仲裁的性质为国际法意义上的国际混合仲裁。
第四章关注晚近国际投资协定争议仲裁中的实体争议焦点问题。首先介绍评价国际投资协定仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准问题,从分析公正与公平待遇标准的起源开始,对公正与公平待遇标准含义的理论分歧和作用进行评析。进而分析公正与公平待遇标准在仲裁实践中的适用,探讨公正与公平待遇标准适用中的焦点问题,介绍并评析公正与公平待遇标准的新发展,并分析中外双边投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准规定存在的问题。其次对国际投资协定争议仲裁中间接征收问题进行探讨。结合仲裁案例分析国际投资协定争议从直接征收的争议到间接征收争议的发展,说明国际投资协定争议仲裁中征收问题的新动向,分析中外双边投资协定中的征收条款。
第五章国际投资协定争议仲裁的监督与执行程序中,结合投资仲裁案例,分析国际投资协定争议仲裁裁决的撤销机制,并对国际投资仲裁上诉机制的可行性进行论证。在仲裁裁决的承认与执行上,重点说明ICSID仲裁裁决的效力及承认与执行,同时结合《纽约公约》说明ICSID外仲裁裁决的承认与执行。
The international investment disputes between foreign private investors and the host country are more complicated and difficult to deal with. This kind of investment disputes not only include disputes based on the investment contract between them, but also include those based on international investment treaties.
Dramatic increasing of investment treaties since the 90's Twenty century, the investment disputes on investment treaties have expanded. In recent years with the prevalence of offer to international investment arbitration of the host States in investment agreements, investors tend to bring international investment arbitration with investors-State arbitration clause of investment agreements to settle the dispute upon them. The investors-State Arbitration in investment treaties has some special characters different from the general Arbitration. International arbitration in investment treaty is the arbitration mainly in disputes between foreign investors and the host state due to BIT or regional investment protection agreement.
At the same time, in recent practice of international arbitration in investment treaty, some new dispute issues have appeared. To a large extent, the development of international investment rules has been impacted with the tribunals' interpretation of the related investment rules. This paper, with the cases of international investment dispute arbitration, with the investment treaty disputes between investors and the host State, is paying attention to the differences and trends of the settlement of the jurisdiction disputes and substantive disputes, analyzing the new development of some investment rules and arbitration mechanism in international investment treaty dispute arbitration practice.
As the biggest capital-importing country in the developing countries and an important capital-exporting country, China should seek to safeguard China's sovereignty and public interests and protect China's overseas investment. Some suggestions on formulation of China's investment treaty is put forward.
This paper is divided into five chapters, as the following:
Chapter I is the basic theory of the International Arbitration in investment treaty. Firstly, to define the international investment treaty with its nature, the types and the core content. Secondly, to analyze the forms, the legal relationship and the settlement of the disputes arising from international investment treaties. Thirdly, to determine the foreign private investors - the host country arbitration in accordance with investment treaties is the threshold of this paper, and to define the international arbitration in investment treaty and to argue that the international arbitration in investment treaties belong to the international mixed arbitration is treaty-based arbitration mechanism. It has its international law nature. Finally, to point out that the main content of the paper and set up it's main framework in this chapter.
It is to analyze the major procedural issues and the focus disputes in recent years of the international arbitration in investment treaty in Chapter II to Chapter V.
In Chapter II the jurisdiction of the international arbitration in investment treaty is to be analyzed. Firstly, to analyze the jurisdictional conditions and the operational characteristics of the ICSID, ICC, UNCITRAL and other ad hoc arbitral tribunal. summarize the main questions on the jurisdiction. Secondly, to explain the jurisdiction of the international arbitration in investment treaty is based on international law. The legal bases are the issued international investment treaty, "Washington Convention" and the arbitration agreement between the two parties of the arbitration. At the last, to review the cases of international arbitration in investment treaties about the nationality of investors and the definition of invest; analyze the exhaustion of local remedies rule, decrypt the relationship between the local remedies and finality requirements, the relationship between the local remedies and the "fork in the road clause"; analyze the expansion of MFN to procedural matters in international investment arbitration; demonstrate the related issues in BITs between China and foreign country, put forward a sound proposal.
In Chapter III, the specificity of the application of the law in international investment arbitration to be analyzed. Focus on comparing the applicable law and arbitration law in ICSID arbitration and out ICSID arbitration, and demonstrating the nature of investment treaty arbitration to be the mixed arbitration in international law lever.
In Chapter IV, analyzing the most talked issues in today's international investment dispute settlement practice. The first to introduce the origin of the fair and equitable treatment standard, then to analyze the theoretical differences of its meaning and its role, and further to discuss the perform of the standard and to explore the new development of the standard, and to analyze the defect in the fair and equitable treatment standard provisions in BITs between China and foreign country. The second to discuss the indirect expropriation problem in international investment arbitration. With studying the related cases, to introduce the development from direct collection to indirect expropriation, to define the norms of indirect expropriation, to descript the influence of investment arbitration practice on the development of the issued rules, and the last to analyze the indirect expropriation provision in BITs between China and foreign country.
Chapter V is on the mechanisms of the supervision and enforcement of the award of international investment arbitration. At first to analyze the revocation of the ruling mechanism on the investment arbitration cases, and to demonstrate the feasibility of the appeal mechanism in international investment arbitration, to discuss its latest reform and development. Next to focuse on the effectiveness of ICSID arbitral awards and the recognition and enforcement of them. At the same time to discuss the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral awards outside ICSID with "New York Convention".
引文
[1] Susan D. Franck.The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privtizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions [J].Fordham Law Review, 2005,(March):73 ;Samrat Ganguly.The Investor-State Dispute Mechanism (ISDM) and a Sovereign's Power to Protect Public Health[J].Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 1999,38; Robert K.Paterson. A New Pandora's Box? Private Remedies for Foreign Investors Under the North American Free Trade Agreement[J].Willianmette Journal of International Law & Dispute Resolusion,2000(8); Hector Olasolo.Have Public Interests Been Forgotten in NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor-Host State Arbitration? Some Conclusions from the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Britishi Columbia on the Case of Mexico v. Metalclad[J]. Law and Business Review of the Americas, Winter/Spring,2002.
[2]M. Sornarajah. The Settlement of Foreign Investment Disputes[M]. Kluwer Law International,2000; Lucy Reed, Jan Paulsson, Nigel Blackaby.Guide to ICSID arbitration[M]. The Hague, New York, Kluwer Law International, 2004.
[3] Howard Mann & Konrad von Moltke. NAFTA's Chapter 11 and the Environment[M].International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999.
[4] Todd Weiler.Intemational Investment Law and Arbitration: Leading Cases from the ICSID,NAFTA, Bilateral Treaties and Customary International Law[M]. London : Cameron May, 2005;Todd Weiler. NAFTA Investment Law and Arbitration: Past Issues, Current Practice, Future Prospects[M]. Transnational Publisher, Inc.2004.
[1]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[2]同上.
[3]同上.
[4]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[5]目前,我国与31个国家和地区进行14个自由贸易区谈判、商签和联合研究工作,已经有7个自由贸易协定生效实施了。其中与香港、澳门签署《更紧密经贸关系安排》及5个补充协议;与东盟签署自由贸易区《货物贸易协议》和《服务贸易协议》,完成投资淡判:与巴基斯坦签署《自由贸易协定》和《服务贸易协定》:与新加坡、新西兰签署《自由贸易协定》;与智利签署《自由贸易协定》和《自由贸易区服务贸易协定》,正开展投资谈判;与秘鲁结束自由贸易谈判;推进与与哥斯达黎加、澳大利亚、冰岛、挪威、海湾合作委员会(包括沙特阿拉伯、科威特、阿联酋、阿曼、卡塔尔和巴林6国)的自由贸易协定谈判;与南部非洲关税同盟启动了自由贸易谈判;完成了与印度的区域贸易安排联合研究,正在开展与韩国的自由贸易区联合研究,还在推进《亚太贸易协定》第四轮谈判,2009年下半年将启动与瑞士的自贸区联合研究。
[6]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[7]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[8]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[9]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[10]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aartiele/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[1]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[2]Jeswald W.Salacuse,Nichloas P.Sullivan.Do BITs Really Work?:An Evaluation of Bilateral Investment Treaties and Their Grand Bargain[J].Harvard International Law Journal.2005,(46):70.
[3]这项协议涵盖来自文莱、印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡及泰国的投资者在这些国家领域内的投资。
[4]这项协议涵盖来自加拿大、墨西哥及美困的投资者在这些国家领域内的投资。
[5]ECT涵盖来自47个缔约国(包括所有欧洲国家及前苏联)的投资者在这些国家能源领域内的投资。
[6]刘琨.杜玉韬.论国际投资法的发展以及我国投资法的重构[J].前沿.2003.(7).
[7]Antonio R.Parra.Provisions on the settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws,Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1997,12,(2):257-288.
[8]慕亚平.国际投资的法律制度[M].广州:广东人民出版社,1999:40.
[9]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].CambridgeUniversity Press.1994:363-365.
[10]林江.国际投资的法律保护[J].引进与咨询,1998,(2).
[11]BIT的数量在二十世纪90年代比80年代增长了5倍,从80年代末的385个到90年代末的1857个。同时,以前的BIT主要是在发达国家与发展中国家间签订的,而近十多年来,在发展中国家和中东欧国家间签订的BIT数量也急剧增加,从80年代末的63个发展到90年代末的833个。UNCTAD.Bilateral Investment Treates,1959-1999.EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[12]Thomas W.Waelde.International Investment Under the 1994 Energy Charter Treaty:Legal,Negotiating and Policy Implication for International Investors within Western and Commonwealth of Independent States/Eastern European Countries[J].Journal of World Trade,1995,12:6.
[13]曹建明,周洪钧,王虎华.国际公法学[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:193-194.
[13]魏敏等.国际法概论[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1986:284.
[14]余劲松.国际投资法[M].北京:法律出版社,2007:216.
[15][英]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].王铁崖等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:32.
[16]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].CambridgeUniversity Press.1994:225.
[17]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic of Sri Lanka,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3,Fina I Award,June 27,1990,[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 1991(6):526.
[18]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/does/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[19]AES Summit Generation Ltd v.Republic of Hungary,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/4,该姚依林是根据ECT提交的首个案件,现已裁决。
[20]A.Redfern,M.Hunter.Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration[M].1991:39-44.
[21]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:2.
[22]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:10.
[23]William W.Park.Arbitration and the FISC:NAFTA's "Tax Veto"[J].Chi.J.Int'l L.2001,(2):231.
[24]Charles N.Brower & Lee A.Steven.Who Then Should Judge?:Developing the International Rule of Law Under NAFTA Chapter 11[J].Chi.J.Int'l L.2001,(2):193,196.
[26]这里的国家及国家机构主要是指可以行使国家公共管理权力的机关,包括某些国家中行使管理权力的国家企业。
[27]S.J.Toope.Mixed International Arbitration:Studies in Arbitration Between States and Private Persons[M].Cambridge:Grotius Pub.Ltd.,1990.
[28]孙南中.国际投资法[M].北京:中国人民出版社,2008:193.
[29]David R.Haigh.Chapter 11-Private Party vs.Government,Investor-State Dispute Settlement:Frankenstein or Safety Value?[J].Can.-U.S.L.J.,2000,26:115,132.
[29]James Mcilroy.Canada' s New Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement-Two Steps Forward.One Sten Back? The Journal of World Investment & Trade[J|.2004.5(4):643.
[31]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[32]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[32]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1985:379.
[33]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[34]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3 - 1.
[35]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[36]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[57]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[58]Kenneth J.Vandeveld.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].Boston:Law and Taxation Publishes,1992.
[59]根据ICSID公约第二十五条第一款和第三款的规定,每一缔约国得自由把特定的自认为合格的公共实体指派到ICSID作为ICSID程序当事人。被指派的公共实体所作的接受ICSID 管辖的同意,还须经该缔约国批准,除非该缔约国通知ICSID不需要这种批准。
[60]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.41.
[61]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.51.
[62]George M.von Meheren,Claudia T.Salomon,Aspasia A.Paroutsas.Navigating through Investor-state Arbitrations-An Overview of Bilateral Investment Treaty Claims[J].Dispute Resolution Journal,2004,(4):38.
[63]Dana H.Freyer,Barry H.Garfinkel,Hamid G.Gharavi.Bilateral Investment Treaties and Arbitration[J].Dispute Resolution Journal,1998,(5):413-416.
[64]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007:285.
[65]绝大多数国际投资协定都规定外国投资者在东道国享有对其财产的所有权、企业控制权和管理经营权、外汇自由兑换与汇出权等权利。
[66]《中华人民共和国宪法》第十八条第二款规定:“在中国境内的外国企业和其他外国经济组织以及中外合资经营的企业,都必须遵守中华人民共和国的法律。他们的合法的权利和利益受中华人民共和国法律的保护。”
[67]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.79.
[68]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.80-81.
[69]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulent,July 3,2002,p.115.[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/vivendi_annul.pdf,2008-5-30.
[70]ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1.
[71]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003.
[72]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[73]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August 30,2000,paras,75-76.
[74]Jurgen Kurtz.The MFN standard and Foreign Investment:An Uneasy Fit?[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2004,5(6):866-867.
[75]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,lCSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.38-64.
[76]Camuzzi International S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/2,Decision on Object ions to Jurisdiction of May 11,2005.
[77]Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and Italstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13,Decision of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction of November29,2004,Award of January31,2006.
[78]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of February8,2005.
[79]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.
[80]Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and lnteragua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006.
[81]Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of Junel 7,2005.
[82]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Award of the Tribunal of December 16,2002.
[83]ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1,Award of the Tribunal of January 9,2003.
[84]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003.
[85]Tecnicas Medioambientales Teemed,S.A.v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award of the Tribunal of May 29,2003.
[86]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.1.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003,International Legal Materials,2003,42:540-559;National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-5-30.
[87]Robert Azinian and others v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/2,Award,1November 1999.
[88]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August30,2000,paras.75-76.
[89]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,Novemberl 3,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5-30.
[90]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5-30.
[91]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,[J].I.L.M.2003,811(42):128.
[92]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003,[J].I.L.M.2004,133(43):154.
[93]MTD Equity Sdn.Bhd.& MTD Chile S.A.v.Chile,Final Award,May25,2004,paras.112-113.
[94]Occidental Exploration and Production Company v.The Republic of Ecuador,Final Award,July 1,2004,p.183.
[95]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,Mayl2,2005,p274.
[96]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,p.98.
[97]Alex Genin v.Republic of Estonia,Award,June25,2001,para.371.
[98]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[99]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[100]Pope & Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[101]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[102]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,para.107.
[103]Eudoro A.Olguin v.Republic of Paraguay,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/5,Award of July26,2001,para.84,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/cases/Oigun-arawd-en.pdf,2008-5-30.
[104]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.ez/statie/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,2008-5-30.
[105]CMS Gas Transmission Co.v.Argentine Republic,Award,2005,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8.
[106]Joy Mining Mach.Ltd.v.Egypt,Award on Jurisdiction,2004,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,[EB/OL].http://www.woridbank.org/icsid/cases/joy-mining-award.pdf,2008-5-30.
[107]Societe Generai de Surveillance S.A.v.Pakistan,Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction,2003,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/13,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf,2008-5-30.
[108]Societe General de Surveillance S.A.v.Philippines,Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction,2004,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/6.
[109]http://www.naftalaw.org/terminal.htm,2008-5-30.
[110]Jeffery Atik,NAFTA Chapter 11:A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques[J].Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law,2005,(3):220.
[111]詹晓宁.国际投资协定近期发展动向分析[N].国际商报,2005,9(23):7.
[112]Dodge,William S.International Decision:Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico.ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1.40[J].American Journal of International Law,2002,95:910-919.
[113]http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/disp/ethyl_archive-en.asp,2008-5-30.
[1]ICSID.ICSID Annual Report 2008[EB/OL].http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=ICSIDPublicationsRH &actionVal=ViewAnnualReports&year=2008-Eng,2009-2-5.截至2007年6月,共有144个国家交存了批准书,但玻利维亚在2008财年退出了ICSID公约,现缔约方为143个。
[2]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[3]Agreement on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments,May25,1995,Bolivia-Ecuador,art.Ⅸ.
[3]参见http//www.pca-cpa.org,2008-5-30.
[4]UNCTAD,Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement[R].New York and Geneva,2006:1.
[5]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:19.
[6]所谓中立地位,在这里不是指政治上的意义,而只是指该仲裁机构不在当事人任何一方国内。 Svetozer Hanek.The Experience of socialist Lawyers in Arbitration Held in Non Socialist countries on Litigation Between Business from East and West[J].International Business Lawyers,1982,(10):147.
[7]A·布鲁彻斯.解决投资争端国际中心的经验[A].见S.鲁宾,R.尼尔森.国际投资争端:避免与解决[M].1985:83.
[8]参见“《ICSID示范条款》第三条”,姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编(下册)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:62.
[9]G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984(1):109:A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:354.
[10]参见ICSID公约第二十五条第三款的规定。
[11]ICSID.Contracting States and measures taken by them for the purpose of the Convention,Part C[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/ICSID Publication,2008-10-8.
[12]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:356.
[13]例如1930年《关于国籍法冲突若干问题的海牙公约》第一条规定:“各国依其国内法判定何者为其国民。此项法律若符合国际公约、国际习惯以及一般承认关于国籍的法律原则,则其他国家应予承认。”即便如此,对于哪些属于“国际习惯以及一般承认关于国籍的法律原则”,也难以判断。
[14]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:39.
[15]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:359.
[16]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:360.
[17]G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984(1):112;
P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:384.
[18]P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:385.
[19]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:23.
[20]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:24-27;
P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:385.
[21]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第9页。
[22]姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:63.
[23]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第9页。
[24]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:34;
G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方而的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984,(1):116-117.
[25]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:34-35.
[26]沙赫特.更加非政治化[J].ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志,1986,(1):4;
G·R·德劳姆.ICSID 仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984,(1):104.
[27]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第8页。
[28]P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:380.
[29]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:192.
[30]这7个国家是:牙买加、圭亚那、巴布新几内亚、沙特阿拉伯、上耳其、以色列和中国。其中,圭亚那和以色列分别于1987年和1991年撤回了通知。ICSID.Contracting States and measures taken by them for the purpose of the Convention,Part D[EB/OL].http://www.woridbank.org/icsid/ICSID Publication,2008-10-8.
[31]ICSID.关于管理调解、仲裁和调查事实的附加程序,ICSID/11,[EB/OL].http://www.worlddbank.org/icsid/,2008-11-1.
[32]]德国-巴基斯坦BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iiajdocs/bits/germany_pakistan.pdf,2008-11-1.
[33]中国-德国BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/china_germany.pdf,2008-11-1.
[34]指在最惠国待遇和国民待遇之间待遇水平不同的情况下,缔约国应给予对方投资者更为优惠的那种待遇。
[35]Metalclad Corporation v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1.
[36]叶兴平.国际投资争端重要法律文献[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:623-624.
[37]全国人大常委会法制工作委员会民法室.中华人民共和国仲裁法全书[M].北京:法律出版社,1995.
[38]例如瑞典分别与马来西亚和南斯拉夫签订的BIT。
[39]例如荷兰分别与肯尼亚、塞内加尔和南斯拉夫签订的BIT。
[39]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet15,1982,2:15.
[40]例如荷兰分别与印度尼西亚、马来西亚、摩洛哥、科特迪瓦、新加坡、韩国和埃及签订的BIT:英国与印度尼西亚、菲律宾,以及日本与埃及之间的BIT。
[41]例如英国分别与孟加拉、埃及、约旦、韩国、马来西亚、巴拉圭、新加坡、斯里兰卡签订的BIT;以及斯里兰卡与新加坡、韩国签订的BIT。
[42]A.Broches.Bilateral Investment Protection Treaties and Arbitration of Investment Disputes[A].in:A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].1995:449-451.
[43]AAPL v.Sri Lank,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3.
[44]ICSID.ICSID Reports,1993,(4):250-254.
[45]Z.M.Eastman.NAFTA's Chapter 11:For Whose Benefit[J].Journal of International Arbitration,1999,(16):105.
[46]Giorgio Sacerdoti.Investment Arbitration Under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2004,Spring:11-12;
Antonio R.Parra.ICSID and Bilateral Investment Treaties[J].News from ICSID,2000,17(1):7.
[47]J.Makarczyk.Prineilples of a New International Economic Order[M].1988:261.
[48]如德国-以色列BIT第一条第三款b项。
[49]如丹麦-印度尼西亚BIT第一条。
[50]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Interim Decision on Preliminary Jurisdictional Issues,December6,2000.本案涉案美国公民在墨西哥拥有永久居所,墨西哥以双重国籍为由抗辩了管辖权。仲裁庭驳回了基于一般国际法提出的异议,认为居所在确定公民身份方面仅有辅助性的功能,见[J].International Legal Materials,2001,40:615.
[51]ICSID Repots,1993,(1):396.
[52]Christoph H.Schreuer.The ICSID Convention:A Commentary[J].Cambridge University Press,2001:279-280.
[53]Christoph H.Schreuer.The ICSID Convention:A Commentary[J].Cambridge University Press,2001:284.
[54]Moshe Hirsch.Arbitration Mechanism of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J].Kluwer Academic Publishers.1993:90-92.
[55]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:863-885.
[56]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Decision of the Arbitral Tribunal,June26,2003[EB/OL].http://naftaclaims.com/Disputes/USA/Loewen/LoewenFinalAward.pdf,2008-10-5.
[57]有关国际条约对此作出了例外规定的情况除外,例如许多人权保护条约中都允许国家在特定情况下对非本国公民采取保护措施。
[58]Ian Brownhe,Principles of Public International Law[M].1998:496-497.
[59]I Oppenheim's International Law 153,at 512(R.Jennings&A.Watts eds.,9~(th)ed.1992).
[60]Georg Schwarzenberger,Intematonal Law[M].1957:593.
[61]Barcelona Traction,Light and Power Co.(Belg.v.Spain),1970 I.C.J.3,202-03(Feb.5)(separate opinion of Judge Jessup).
[62]John Dugard.First Report on Diplomatic Protection,U.N.GAOR International Law Commission,52d Sess.,P16,U.N.Doc.A/CN.4/506(2000),[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/law/ilc/sessions/52/52docs.htm,2008-11-28.
[63]Edwin Borchard.Diplomtic Protection of Citizens Abroad[M].1915:34.
[64]J.Paulsson.ICSID's Achievements and Prospects[J].ICSID Rev.-FILJ.1991,(6):380
[65]Fedax N.V.v.Republic of Venezuela,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/3.
[66]Fedax N.V.v.Republic of Venezuela,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/3,Decision of the Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.34-35.
[67]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4.
[68]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.63-65.
[69]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.72-74.
[70]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.81-83.
[71]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.77.
[72]S.D.Myer Inc.v.Government of Canada,First Partial Award,November 13,2000.
[73]Pope & Talbot v.Government of Canada,Interim Award,June 26,2000.
[74]Mihaly International Corporation v.Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.ICSID Case No.ARB/00/2,Award,Para.41.
[75]Mihaly International Corporation v.Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.ICSID Case No.ARB/00/2,Award,Para.49.
[76]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction.
[77]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction,Para.44.
[78]相关资产或交易要构成ICSID公约第二十五条规定的投资,必须满足的五项要求是:具有一定的持续期间,具有预期利润或收入,承担一定的风险,数额较大,能够促进东道国的解决发展。见Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction,Para.54.
[79]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:141.
[80]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.
[81]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,lCSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.19.
[82]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.36.
[83]第一点理由已在上文阐述,即投资者不符合国籍继续要求。
[84]Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co.S.A.v.Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/6,Award.para.71.
[85]Alex Genin,Eastern Credit Limited,lnc.and A.S.Baltoil v.The Republic of Estonia,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/2,Award.
[86]第一条.第十一条是有关投资者与东道国之间的争端解决的规定。
[87]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.38-64.
[88]Camuzzi International S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/2,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of May11,2005;Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and ltalstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13,Decision of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction of November29,2004,Award of January31,2006;Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of FebruaryS,2005;Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June17,2005.
[89]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Award of the Tribunal of December 16,2002;ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1,Award of the Tribunal of January 9,2003;The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003;Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed,S.A.v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award of the Tribunal of May 29,2003.
[90]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.I.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003,International Legal Materials,Vol.42,2003,paras.540-559;National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-11-18.
[91]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24.在 Plama案中,塞浦路斯投资者Plama收购了保加利亚的一家炼油公司。Plama诉称,保加利亚政府故意采取的各种刁难措施构成了对该公司的“间接征收”。就此,Plama向ICSID提起仲裁的依据之一是:1987年保加利亚与塞浦路斯BIT(以下简称《保塞条约》)第四条规定,有关征收补偿额的争端只能提交特设仲裁庭仲裁,而且事先必须经过东道国常规的行政和司法救济程序。然而,此前保加利亚与芬兰BIT(以下简称《保芬条约》)对提交ICSID仲裁的征收争端没有限定范围,且规定的条件相当宽松。于是,Plama援用《保塞条约》第三条规定的最惠国待遇条款,要求享有《保芬条约》中该项关于争端解决程序事项的更优惠待遇。2005年ICSID仲裁庭作出裁决,否定了Plama基于最惠国待遇的该项管辖权请求。针对《保塞条约》中的最惠国待遇条款,该案裁决指出:“不能推定缔约各方已经同意,(争端解决)条款能够通过嵌入在完全不同境况下谈判形成的其他条约之争端解决条款,而使其变大。”
[92]Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and Italstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13.
[93]《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条第一款。
[94]《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条第二款。
[95]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.54-56.
[96]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.60.
[97]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.
[98]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.83-86.
[99]National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,para.93.2008-11-19.
[100]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.83-86;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June17,2005,para.30;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006,para.56.
[101]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.80-81;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006,para.57.
[102]O.E.Gareia-Bolivar.The Teleology of International Investment Law:The Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment &Trade,2005,6:751-771.
[103]J.Kurtz.The MFN Standard and Foreign Investment:An Uneasy Fit?[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2004,5:870-871.
[104]R.Teitelbaum.Who's Afraid of Maffezini? Recent Developments in the Interpretation of Most Favored Clauses[J].Journal of International Arbitration,2005,22(3):225-226.
[105]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.42.
[106]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdietion of January25,2000.para.64.
[107]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.para.120;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June 17,2005,para.28.
[108]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.I.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003[J].International Legal Materials,Vol.2003,42:83.
[109]R.Dolzer & T.Myers.After Tecmed:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19:59.
[110]Dana H.Freyer,David Herlihy.Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How"Favored"is"Most-Favored"?[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2005,20(1):61-62.
[111]Amr A.shalakany.Arbitration and the Third World:A Plea for Reassessing Bias under the Specter of Neoliberalism[J].Harvard International Law Journal,2000,41:419-424.
[112]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of February8,2005.
[113]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[114]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁[M].上海:复且大学出版社,2001:6.
[115]这13个BIT的缔约另一方分别是:韩国、立陶宛、智利、冰岛、秘鲁、摩洛哥、以色列、南斯拉夫、沙特阿拉伯、加蓬、喀麦隆、马其顿、也门。其中,中国-喀麦隆BIT已经废止。
[116]这28个BIT的缔约另一方分别是:巴巴多斯、刚果(布)、博茨瓦纳、塞浦路斯、塞拉利昂、莫桑比克、肯尼亚、荷兰、缅甸、波黑、特立尼达和多巴哥、科特迪瓦、圭亚那、德国、贝宁、拉脱维亚、乌干达、约旦、芬兰、朝鲜、捷克、西班牙、葡葡牙、瓦努阿图、俄罗斯、印度、吉布提、突尼斯。
[117]即1999年中国-巴林BIT,仅就“有关征收补偿额的争议”接受ICSID仲裁管辖权。
[118]余劲松,詹晓宁.国际投资协定的近期发展及对中国的影响[J].法学家,2006,(3):154.
[119]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[120]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[121]Jonathan Fried.Globalization and International Law-Some Thoughts for Citizens and States[J].Queen's Law Journal 1997,(23):259,274.
[122]Howard Mann.NAFAT and the Environment:Lessons for the Future[J].Tulane Environmental Law Journal 2000,(13):408.
[123]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.html,2009-3 -2.
[124]1990年2月9日由当时的驻美大使朱启桢代表中国政府签署参加ICSID公约。
[125]例如,我国BIT范本中关于投资者的定义规定,投资者包括自然人和法人。法人包括根据缔约国任何一方的法律设立或者组建和具有住所的公司、社团、合伙和其他组织。
[126]例如,美国2004年的BIT范本关于投资者的定义条款规定,“缔约国一方的投资者”是指试图投资、正在投资或者已经投资的该缔约国一方本身、国有企业或者缔约国一方的自然人或企业:缔约国一方的企业,是指根据缔约国一方的法律组建或者成立的企业,或者位于缔约国一方境内并在缔约国一方境内从事业务活动的上述企业的分支机构。加拿大2004年BIT范本关于投资者的定义条款规定,就加拿大一方而言,“缔约国一方的投资者”是指,试图投资、正在投资或者已经投资的加拿大国家、加拿大国有企业或者加拿大的企业或者国民;加拿大的企业是指,根据缔约国一方的法律组建或者成立的企业,或者位于缔约国一方境内并在缔约国一方境内从事业务活动的上述企业的分支机构。显然,两者关于投资者的定义十分相近。
[127]即上文提到的联合国国际法委员会1978年《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条的规定:基础条约规定了最惠国条款:授予国在第三方条约中给予第三国的特定待遇属于基础条约最惠国条款的主题范畴;授予国在第三方条约中给予第三国的特定待遇优于其在基础条约中给予受惠国的相同主题待遇;受惠国的得以依据最惠国条款取得权利的与其有确定关系的人或事,不但其类型与从上述特定待遇中受益的与第三国有确定关系的人或事的类型相同,而且其与受惠国的关系也与从上述特定待遇中受益的人或事与该第三国的关系相同。
[128]相应的BIT的缔约另一方包括立陶宛(1993年)、智利(1994年)、秘鲁(1994年)、摩洛哥(1995年)、加蓬(1997年)、也门(1998年)、巴林(1999年)。这些BIT都未就“与投资有关的活动”的含义或者范围进行界定。
[129]相应的BIT的缔约另一方包括冰岛(1994年)、以色列(1995年)。
[130]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为南斯拉夫(1995年)。
[131]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为沙特阿拉伯(1996年)。
[132]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为马其顿(1997年)。
[1]White.Expropriations of the Libyan Oil Concessions:Two Conflicting International Arbitrations[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1981,30:7.
[2]J A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:385.
[3]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,19822:41-43.
[4]这些规则主要规定在公约第三十六条.六十三条。
[5]例如关于提交仲裁申请和登记的第三十六条是不允许变更的,而关于仲裁员任命的第三十七条则允许变更。
[6]现行适用的是2002年9月修订,自2003年1月开始生效的《ICSID仲裁程序规则》。
[7]ICSID公约的目标在于平衡东道国和投资者双方的利益,使东道国免受投资者母国的不正当干预,使投资者免受东道国主权豁免的影响。因此,“中立的国际法庭”是双方利益平衡的结果。
[8]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:19.
[9]J.D.Lew.Applieable Law in International Commercial Arbitration[M].1978:535.
[10]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:115.
[11]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:206.
[12]William W.Park.The Lex Loci Arbiti,and International Commercial Arbitration[J].International and Comparative Law Qurterly,1983,32:23.
[13]J.Paulsson.Arbitration Unbound:Award Detached from the Law of Its Country of Origin[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly,1981,30:358.
[14]《1923年关于仲裁条款的议定书》第二条规定,仲裁程序受当事人共同意志和仲裁地法的支配。
[15]关于各国国内法的有关规定,参见程德钧、王生长.涉外仲裁与法律(第一辑1992年版)、(第二辑1994年版)。关于各国国内有关的司法判例,参见韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:412-420.
[16]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:12.
[17]主要是各种有关承认和执行仲裁裁决的公约和条约,尤其重要的是1958年《纽约公约》。
[18]阿库斯特认为,一般法律原则是国际上公认的国际法与国内法原则的总和。参见阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1981:41.
[19]各国国内的仲裁法也开始趋向于减少对仲裁程序具体规则的限制,而仅保留某些关于正当程序的基本规则,如法国、瑞士的立法。
[20]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:347.
[21]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:119;A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States:Applicable Law and Default Procedure[A].in A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995:179-187.
[22]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:389.
[23]P.F.Sutherland.The World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1979,28:394.
[24]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff publishers,1993:125-130.
[25]A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of other States:Applicable Law and Default Procedure[A].in selected Essays-World Bank,ICSID and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995:181.
[26]Mosbe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff Publisbers,1993:121.
[27]Ibrahim F.I.Shihata,Antonio R.Para.Applicable Substantive Law in Disputes Between States and Private Foreign Parties:the Case of Arbitration under the ICSID Convention[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,1994,(9):189.
[28]Joy Cberian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:115.
[29]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:115.
[30]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:77.
[31]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):109-115页.
[32]朱利安·P·M·卢.国际商事仲裁中可适用的法律[M].1975:350.
[33]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:68.
[34]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:68-69.
[35]W.Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2000,(Fall):371.
[36]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):109-115.
[37]Report of the Executive Directors on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States,p.13.
[38]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):112.
[39]明A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:392.
[40]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic ofSri Lanka(1990),ICSID Reports 245.
[41]John A.Westberg.Applicable Law,Expropriatory Takings and Compensation in Cases of Expropriation:ICSID and Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Case Law Compared[J].ICSID Review-FILJ 1993,(8):8.
[42]W.Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshoid[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2000,(Fall):374,380.
[43]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:90.
[44]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:422;
卢绳祖.国际商事仲裁所适用的法律[J].法学评论,1984,(1):9.
[45]西蒙特.友谊仲裁的理由[A].施米特夫.国际商事仲裁报告[M].130:136-147;
朱利安·P·M·卢.国际商事仲裁中可适用的法律[M].1978:508.
[46]大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国政府和阿根廷共和国政府关于促进与保护投资的协定,1990年12月11日签订,1993年2月19日生效。
[47]Agreement on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments,Mar22,1994,Brazil-Chile,art.Ⅷ(5).
[48]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Award on Jurisdiction,January25,2000.
[49]Compania de Aguas del Aconquija S.A.& Vivendi Universal S.A.(formerly Compagnie Geneale des Eaux) v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulment,July3,2002.
[50]A.Parra,Applicable Substantive Law in ICSID Arbitrations Initiated Under Investment Treaties[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):20.
[51]《维也纳条约法公约》第二条第一款a项及第三十一条第三款c项。
[52]《国家对国际不法行为的责任条款》(草案)案文第三条,国际法委员会2001年通过。
[53]ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulment,July3,2002[J].I.L.M.,2002,1135(41):95-96.
[54]ICSID Case No.ARB/96/1,Final Award,February 17,2000[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,167(15):64-65.
[55]Wena Hotels Ltd v.Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/4,Decision on Annulment,February 5,2002[J].I.L.M.,2002,933(41):31-36.
[56]Asia Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic of Sri Lanka,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3,Final Award,June27,1990[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991,(6):20-21.
[57]K.V andevelde.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].1992:106.
[58]M.Reisman.The Regime for Lacunae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,(15).
[59]Compania del Desarrollo de Santa Elena SAv.Republic of Costa Rica,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/1,Final Award,February17,2000[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,(15):64.
[60]NAFTA,art.1131,1132.
[61]Andrew E.L.Tueker.Energy Charter Treaty and"Compulsory" International State/Investor Arbitration[J].Leiden Journal of International Law,1998,(3):525.
[62]Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions(NAFTA Free Trade Commission,July31,2001 ),[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-lnterpr-en.asp,2008-8-6.
[63]Todd Weilet.Newsletter Commentary on July 31st Commission Statement,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[64]Statements of the NAFTA Free Trade Commission on the Operation of Chapter11,October,7,2003[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[65]NAFTA,Article2001.
[66]Ian A.Laird.NAFTA Chapter11:Betrayal,Shock And Outrage-Recent Developments in Nafta Article 1105[J].Asper Rev.Int' l Bus.& Trade L.2003,185(3 ):213.
[67]例如1994年中国-冰岛BIT就没有提及ICSID仲裁准据法问题。
[1]J.C.Thomas.Reflections on Article 1105 of NAFTA:History,State Practice and the Influence of Commentators[J].ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2002,17(1):44.
[2]Havana Charter[EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com/instruments/Havana%20Charter%201948.pdf,2008-4-8.
[3]Christoph Schreuer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade,2005,6(3):357
[4]UNCTAD,Fair and Equitable Treatment,paras.15-16.[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/psiteiitdllv3.en.pdf,2008-11-30.
[5]成员国为阿根廷、巴西、巴拉圭及乌拉圭。
[6]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-25.
[7]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:318.
[8]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:216.
[9]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:216.
[10]http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200504/20050400033864,html,2008-11-22.
[11]ECT.Article 10 Promotion,Protection and Treatment of Investments(1) Each Contracting Party shall,in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty,encourage and create stable,equitable,favourable and transparent conditions for Investors of other Contracting Parties to Make Investments in its Area.Such conditions shall include a commitment to accord at all times to Investments of Investors of other Contracting Parties fair and equitable treatment.
[12]比如捷克-美国BIT第二条(a)项:阿根廷-美国BIT第二条第二款(a)项。
[13]Patrick G.Foy,Robert J.C.Deane.Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties:Recent Developments under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement,ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2001(16):302.
[14]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究--由NAFTA实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005,(6):47.
[15]刘笋.双边投资条约中的绝对待遇标准评析[J].武汉大学学报,2003,(2):56.
[16]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999:441.
[17]Stephen Vasciannie.The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].British Year Book of International Law,1999(70):99.
[18]UNCTAD.International Investment Agreements:Key issues[J].UNCTAD Publications.2004,(1):209.
[19]Robert Azinian and Others v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/2,Award,1November1999.本案涉及到一项特许权契约,申请人的公司于1993年11月获得了墨西哥Naucalpan市政府授予的搜集和处理固体废物的特许权。但是,从该项特许权产生之初就产生了很多履行方面的问题,随后又进行了当地的诉讼,新选举成立的一届市政府又打算撤销该项特许权,于是申请人的公司在墨西哥的三级法院进行了层层诉讼,但均以失败告终。最终,申请人提起NAFTA第十一章仲裁,申请认定墨西哥政府撤销特许权的行为违反NAFTA第一千一百零五条和第一千一百一十条(征收问题)的规定,申请人认为墨西哥政府不仅拒绝给予其公司公正与公平的待遇,并且其撤销特许权的行为征收了其在合同项下所享有的权利。
[20]Charles Brower.Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA:the Empire Strikes Back[J].Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,2001,43(40):56;S.Vasciannie.The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1999,99(70):163;and F.A.Mann,British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,(52):243.
[21]美国的Metalclad公司1997年1月对墨西哥联邦政府提起诉讼,指控其对该公司在墨西哥的危险废物处理设施开发采取的措施违反了NAFTA第一千一百零五条(最低待遇标准)和第一千一百一十条(征收)的规定。
[22]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.75-76.
[22]S.D.Myers案涉及加拿大政府实施的一项关于PCB废物的出口禁令(在美国临时取消从加拿大进口这种废物的禁令之后不久发布),加拿大环境部长发布这项禁令的目的是要确保该种废物在加拿大加工,促进国内加工产业的健康发展。但是,申请人在美国俄亥额州建立了一家PCB处理厂,打算通过将加拿大产生的PCB废物运送到俄亥额州处理来提供跨境服务。他认为这项禁令影响了其投资利益。于是申请人Myers公司于1998年10月对加拿大政府提起了2亿美元的求偿要求,诉称加拿大违反了第一千一百零二条规定的国民待遇义务,第一千一百零五条的公正与公平待遇义务,以及第一千一百一十条征收问题的规定。
[23]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,November13,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-28.
[24]Pope&Talbot公司系美国的一家木材公司,该公司于1999年3月对加拿大政府提出求偿要求,指控加拿大政府关于软木出口配额的分配违反了NAFTA第一千一百零二条(国民待遇)、第一千一百零五条(最低待遇标准)、第一千一百零六条(履行要求)以及第一千一百一十条(征收)的规定。
[25]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-28.
[26]Catherine Yannaca-Small,Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-28.
[27]http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-interpr-en.asp,2008-11-28.
[28]UNCTAD.Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements,Fair and Equitable Treatment,[M].1999:39-40.
[29]朱小菁.NAFTA投资仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社.2006:75.
[30]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003[J].I.L.M.2003,(42):128.
[31]Genin Award.Para.367.Article Ⅱ(3)(a) of the BIT requires the signatory governments to treat foreign investment in a "fair and equitable" way.Under international law,this requirement is generally understood to "provide a basic and general standard which is detached from the host State's domestic law." While the exact content of this standard is not clear,the Tribunal understands it to require an "international minimum standard" that is separate from domestic law,but that is,indeed,a minimum standard.Acts that would violate this minimum standard would include acts showing a willful neglect of duty,an insufficiency of action falling far below international standards,or even subjective bad faith.
[32]R.Dolzer,M.Stevens.Bilateral Investment Treaties[M].The Hague,Martinus Nijhoff,1995:59.
[33]F.A.Mann.British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,(52):241.
[34]Omar Garcia- Bolivar.The Teleology of International Investment Law-the Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment &Trade,2005,6(5):763-771.
[35]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August30,2000,paras.74-101.
[36]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003[J].I.L.M.2004,(43):154.
[37]MTD Equity Sdn.Bhd.& MTD Chile S.A.v.Chile,Final Award,May25,2004,paras.112-113.
[38]Occidental Exploration and Production Company v.The Republic of Ecuador,Final Award,July 1,2004,para.183.
[39]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,May12,2005,para.274.
[40]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005:269.
[41]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.98.
[42]Christoph Schemer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3);Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade2005,6(2).
[43]Christoph Scheruer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3):381
[44]Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade2005,6(2):305.
[45]Alex Genin v.Republic of Estonia,Award,June25,2001,para.371.
[46]Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co S.A.(Greece) v.Egypt,Award,April 12,2002,para.143.
[47]Tecmed Award.Para.162.
[48]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.91,99.
[49]Mondev lntemational LTD v.United States of America,Award,October11,2002,paras.95-96.
[50]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,paras.132-134.
[51]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,paras.137,142-157.
[52]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,para.76.
[53]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.99.
[54]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Review by British Columbia Supreme Court,2 May,2001,para.72.
[55]Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Law[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(2):305.
[56]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.98.
[57]案件起因于,西班牙一个具有公共职能的政府机构从投资者的私人账户转移了30万西班牙币到投资者所投资的公司账户,虽然投资者同意转让这笔资金,但是政府机构在投资者正式同意并协商好金融安排及贷款的细节问题之前,政府就转让了该笔资金。
[58]申请人经营一家危险废物掩埋厂Cyrtar,经营Cyrtar须得到墨西哥政府机构INE的许可证。申清人开始取得了该项许可证,随后还进行了续期,但是1998年11月,INE拒绝继续批准申请人的续期申请,并在同一天作出项决议拒绝授权Cyrtar经营掩埋厂,要求其关闭。
[59]智利政府(被申请人)与投资者签订了一份投资契约,计划修建一个大型的社区。但是,后来却发现这个修建计划违反了智利的区域划分法规的规定,建设计划无法开展。
[60]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Award,November13,2000[J].ICSID Review -Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):83.
[61]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English.Translation,29 May 2003.paras.153-154.
[62]MTD Award,Para.163.
[63]Thoms Walde.Separate Opinion of the Final Award of international Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v.Mexico,para.37[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_separate_opinion.pdf,2008-12-1.
[64]J.Paulsson.Investment Protection Provisions in Treaties[A].in International Chamber of Commerce,Investment Protection /La Protection de l' Investissement[M].2000:22.
[65]CME Czech Republic BV(The Netherlands) v.The Czech Republic,Partial Award,Septemberl3,2001,Nexis Mealey Publications Doc.No.05-011127-013A,para.611,also [EB/OL].http://www.cetv-net.com/arbitration.asp,2008-11-27.
[66]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003[J].I.L.M.,2004,133(43):152-174.
[67]OEPC Final Award,July 1,2004,paras.183-187;CMS Award,paras.274-281.
[68]International Thunderbird Gaming corporation v.Mexico,Arbitral Award,January26,2006,paras.147-167.
[69]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English Translation,29 May 2003,paras.153-154.
[70]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.138.
[71]Mondev International LTD v.United States of America,Award,October11,2002,para.116.
[72]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English Translation,29 May 2003.paras.153.
[73]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,May 12,2005,para.280.
[74]美国2004年BIT范本[EB/OL].http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/prsrl/2004/28923.htm,2008-11-12.
[75]如美国与澳大利亚、中美洲、智利、摩洛哥以及新加坡签署的自由贸易协定。
[76]Patrick G.Foy,Robert J.C,Deane.Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties: Recent Developments under Chapter11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):317.
[77]加拿大2004年BIT范木[EB/OL],http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/what_fipa-en.asp,2008-2-23.
[78]陈辉萍,黄玉梅.国际投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准的新发展[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:11-13.
[79]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award on Damages,May 31,2002,para.13.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-2.
[80]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[81]中华人民共和国对外贸易经济合作部.国际投资条约汇编[Z].北京:警官教育出版社1998.
[82]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[83]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[84]Michael G.Parisi.Moving Toward Transparency? An Examination of Regulatory Taking[J].Emory International Law Review,2005,(19):388.
[85]Forward.Introduction to Regulatory Expropriation in International Law and Case Summaries[J].New York University Environmental Law Journal,2002,(11 ).
[86]Barton Legum.Lessons Learned from the NAFTA:The New Generation of U.S.Investment Treaty Arbitration Provisions[J].ICSID-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):344-348.
[87]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-8-9.
[88]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[89]Pope & Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[90]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[91]Corlos E.Alfaro,Pedro M.Lorenti.The Growing Opposition of Argentina to ICSID Arbitral Tribunals- A Conflict between International and Domestic Law?[J].The Journal of World Trade and Investment,2005,6(3).
[92]国家作其代表。
[93]Francisco Orrego Vicuna.Regulatory Expropriations in International Law:Carlos Calvo,Honorary NAFTA Citizen[J1.New York University Environmental Law Journal.2002.11:23.
[94]《奥本海国际法》(第九版)指出,“按照国际习惯法,原则上一个国家在对待本国领土内外国人方面具有的广泛的自由决定权,一般也适用于外国人在国家境内的财产。例如,一个国家可以限制外国人持有财产的权利;对私有财产的广泛的干预,包括外国人的财产在内。在关于税收、警察措施、公共卫生、公用事业的管理和城乡的规划这些问题方面,已属司空见惯。见王铁崖等.奥本海国际法(第九版),第一卷第二分册,[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998:323.
[95]Lauder v.Czech Republic,UNCITRAL,Final Award,September 3,200 1,para.200[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/LauderAward.pde2008-11-3.
[96]例如,中国-阿根廷BIT第四条第一款。ECT第十三条也规定,缔约一方投资者的投资在另一缔约方区域内不应被国有化、征收或者被采取等同于国有化或征收效果的措施。NAFTA第一千一百一十条规定,一方不得在其境内对另一方投资者的投资实行直接或间接的国有化或征收,或者对此项投资采取等同于国有化或征收的措施。
[97]例如,美国-阿根廷BIT第四条第一款。德国BIT通常也规定财产保护扩及到“其效果相当于征收或国有化的任何其它措施”。
[98]Bjφrn Kunoy.Developments in Indirect Expropriation Case Law in ICSID Transnational Arbitration[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3):472.
[99]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,para,200.2008-11-3.
[100]Metalclad Corporation v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1,Award,August 30,2000[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/mm- award-e.pdf,2008-11-3.该 案中,原告在墨西哥投资开发和经营一家有害垃圾填埋场,投资前获得了墨西哥政府的许可。建成后,填埋场所在地的地方政府却以可能破坏环境为由拒绝许可其经营。仲裁庭认为地方政府的行为等同于征收。
[101]NAFTA第一千一百一十条规定:“任何缔约国不得对其他缔约国的投资者的投资(investment)……直接或间接实行国有化或征收,或采取相当于国有化或征收的措施(a measure tantamount to nationalization or expropriation),除非……”。该条规定的征收范围不仅包括直接征收和间接征收,还包括了东道国所采取的任何与征收具有相同影响的措施。
[102]Pope&Talbot Inc.v.Government of Canada,Interim Award,June 26,2000[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/ma-nac/documents/pubdoc7.pdf,2008-11-3.在该案中,原告通过在加拿大的子公司制造并向美国出口软木,1996年,加拿大根据美加两国的协定,对向美国出口的软木实施数量限制。原告认为加拿大政府的措施根据NAFTA第一千一百一十条等同于征收。仲裁庭最后否定了原告的此项主张。
[103]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,Partial Award,November 13,2000[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/documents/myersvcanada-partialaward final 13-11-00.pdf,2008-11-3.该案中,原告通过在加拿大的子公司向美国出口印刷电路板进行处理,但加拿大随后制定了一项出口禁令,禁止向美国出口印刷电路板废物,对原告子公司的经营造成了影响。
[104]Marin Roy Feldman Karpa(CEMSA) v.Unitied Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB (AF)/99/1,Award of 16 December 2002.[EB/OL].http://www.world-bank.org/icsid/cases/feldman_mexico-award-en.PDF,2008-11-3.该案中,一家外国贸易公司从墨西哥出口香烟,墨西哥政府拒绝为该公司办理出口退税。原告认为墨西哥政府违反了NAFTA第一千一百一十条,构成征收。仲裁庭否认了原告的主张。
[105]Stephen Fietta.Expropriation and Fair and Equitable Standard(BIICL Fifth Investment Treaty Conference),p.1,[EB/OL].http://www.biicl.org,2008-11-3.
[106]Stephen Fietta.The"Legitimate Expectation"Principle under Article 1105NAFTA-International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v.The United Mexican States[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade,2006,7(3):425.
[107]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1,Final Award,30August,2000,para.103.
[108]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,paras.224,286.
[109]International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v.The United Mexican States,Arbitral Award,January26,2006,paras.147.[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_award.pdf,2008-11-3.
[110]Rudolf Dolzer.Indirect Expropriation:New Development?[J].New York University Enviromental Law Journal,2002,11:78-79.
[111]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,para.107.
[112]L.Yves Fortier,Stephen L.Drymer.Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment:I Know It When I See It,or Caveat Investor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):314.
[113]TippeRs,Abbett,McCarhy,Stratton v.TAMS-AFFA Consulting Engineers of Iran,Award No.141-7-2(1984),6 IRAN-U.S.C.T.R.,pp.225-226.
[114]Eudoro A.Olguin v.Republic of Paraguay,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/5,Award of July26,2001,para.84,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/cases/Olgun-arawd-en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[115]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,2008-11-3.
[116]L.Yves Fortier,Stephen L.Drymer,Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment:I Know It When I See It,or Caveat lnvestor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):315.
[117]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Partial Award,November13,2001,paras.164-195.[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/S.DMyers-1stPartialAward.pdf,2008-11-3.
[118]Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed S.A,v.The United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003,[J].I.L.M.2004,(43):118.该案中,一家西班牙公司的子公司在墨西哥经营一家有害垃圾填埋场,墨西哥联邦政府主管生态和环境的部门在垃圾填埋场经营的第3年未再继续发放许可,原告公司认为墨西哥政府违反了西班牙与墨西哥的投资协定,构成征收。仲裁庭支持了原告。
[119]Compaia del Desarrollo de Santa Elena v.Costa Rica,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/11,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/santaelena_award.pdf,2008-11-3.该案中,哥斯达黎加政府以承担保护环境的国际义务为理由,针对原告公司的财产发布了一项征收法令。仲裁庭认为,不论是为了保护国际环境还是国内环境,只要财产被征收,国家就有义务补偿。
[120]参见美国-新加坡FTA第十五条第六款:NAFTA第一千一百一十条:美国-阿根廷BIT 第四条第一款。
[121]Exchange of Letters on Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Singapore_FTA/Final_Texts/asse t upload_file58_4058.pdf,2008-11-3.
[122]U.S.A-Chile FTA,Annex10-D,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Chile_FRA/Final_Texts/asset_up Ioad_file4004.pdf,2008-11-3.
[123]U.S.A-Australia FTA,Annex 11-B,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Australia_FTA/Final_Texts/asset upload_file148_5168.pdf,2008-11-3.
[124]U.S.A-The Central America-Dominican Republic FTA,Chapter Ten,Annex10-C,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.g~v/assets/Trade-Agreements/Bi~atera~/CAFTA/CAFTA-DR-Fina~-Texts/asset-u pload file328_4718.pdf,2008-11-3.
[125]U.S.A 2004 BIT Model,Annex B-Expropriation,EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/USmodelbitnov04.pdf,2008-11-3.
[126]Canada 2004 BIT Model,Annex B.13(1)-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/Canadian2004.FIPA-model-en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[127]U.S.A-Uruguay BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/BIT/Uruguay/asset_upload_file748_9005.pdf.2008-11-3.
[128]见1979年《中外合资经营企业法》第二条第二款、1986年《外资企业法》第五条。
[129]见中国宪法2004年修正案第十三条。
[130]中国-韩国BIT第五条第二款。
[131]中国-法国BIT第四条第二款。
[132]中国-瑞典BIT第三条第一款。
[133]中国-摩洛哥BIT第四条第一款。
[134]史量才嫡孙投资问题与《华盛顿公约》[N].南方周末,2004,11(25):C17.
[135]最高人民法院关于执行《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》若干问题的解释,1999年11月24日最高人民法院审判委员会第1085次会议通过.法释(2000)8号,第一部分“受案范围”第一条“公民、法人或者其他组织对下列行为不服提起诉讼的,不属于人民法院行政诉讼的受案范围”第(六)项,“对公民、法人或者其他组织权利义务不产生实际影响的行为。”
[136]本案一审及二审审理结果来源于上海一中院内部信息网。
[137]“国民或公司与东道国之间争议的解决”规定在1986年中英BIT第七条,“一、缔约一方的国民或公司与缔约另一方之间有关征收补偿款额的争议,在提出书面通知该项争议之后六个月内未能友好解决,应提交国际仲裁。二、如将争议提交国际仲裁,有关的国民或公司和缔约另一方可同意将争议提交:(甲)争议双方指定的一个国际仲裁员;(乙)依照争议双方问的一项专门协议指定的专设仲裁庭;(丙)依照联合国国际贸易法委员会仲裁规则设市的专设仲裁庭。三、如按上述第二款将争议提交仲裁后三个月内没有就任一可选择的程序达成协议,争议双方有义务依照当时有效的联合国国际贸易法委员会仲裁规则将争议提交仲裁。争议双方可书而同意修改规则。”
[138]走出去七大经营风险[EB/OL].http://www.caiec.org/2005/policy view.asp?id=141.2008-5-5.
[139]童莉霞.关于中国石油行业发展海外投资的研究[EB/OL].http://www.caitec.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/a/c/200404/20040400203170.html,2005-5-5.
[1]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289.
[2]ICSID公约第五十条。
[3]ICSID公约第五十一条。
[4]这16起撤销程序即:Klockner等诉喀麦隆案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/2;Amco 等诉印尼案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/1;国际海运代理公司诉几内业案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/84/4:重新提起的Klockner等诉喀麦隆案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/2:重新提起的Amco等诉印尼案撤销程序,ICSID CaseNo.ABR/81/1:SPP(中东)诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/84/3;Gruslin诉马来西亚案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/99/3:Wena诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/98/4;Vivendi诉阿根延案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/97/3;CDC诉塞舌尔案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/02/14:R.F.C.C.诉摩洛哥案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/00/6;Joy诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/03/11;Mitchell诉民主刚果案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/99/7:Repsol诉厄瓜多尔石油公司案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/01/10;MTD诉智利案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/01/7;Soufraki诉阿联酋案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/02/7.
[5]Philippe Gruslin v.Malaysia,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/3,Award of November27,2000[A],in James Crawford,Karen Lee,Elihu Lauterpacht.ICSID Report[M].Cambridge University Press,2002:484;ICSID.List of Concluded Cases [EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/conclude.htm,2008-3-9.
[6]ICSID.Disputes before the Centre[J].News from ICSID,1989,6(1):2.
[7]ICSID公约第五十二条第一款。
[8]分别为Amoco案(一)、Klockner案(一)。
[9]Georges R.Delaume.The Finality of Arbitrations Involving States:Recent Development[J].Arbitration International,1989,5:3.
[10]分别为Amoco案(一)、Klockner案(一)、Wena案、CDC案的撤销申请人。
[11]Aron Broches.Observations on the Finality of ICSID Awards[J].lCSlD Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991,6(2):328.
[12]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[13]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[14]Wena Hotels Limited v.Arab Republic of Egypt,Decision on Annulment,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/4,para.19.Wena案的案情梗概是:英国籍Wena公司与埃及宾馆公司(以下简称“埃宾公司”)签订了两份合同,以租赁和管理位于勒克苏和开罗的两处宾馆。不久双方就租金支付问题发生争议。在埃宾公司的参与下,大批群众袭击并抢回了Wena公司租赁和管理的这两处饭店。虽经埃及检察总长裁断,埃宾公司返还了这两处宾馆,但其随后成功地使法院为该两宾馆指定了破产管理人并将Wena公司驱逐出该两宾馆。1998年7月,Wena公司向ICSID申请仲裁。仲裁庭认为,就算埃及没有参与对Wena公司所租宾馆的袭击,埃及也没有防止抢回宾馆行为的发生,随后也没有保护Wena公司的投资,因此,埃及没有给Wena公司在埃及的投资以“公正与公平待遇”和“全面的保护与安全”,违反了埃及-英国BIT。此外,埃及的行为也相当于未依照埃及.英国BIT所规定的“充分、及时、有效”标准进行补偿的征收。有鉴于此,裁决埃及赔偿Wena公司2000余万美元损失。2001年1月,埃及申请撤销仲裁裁决,专门委员会最终驳回了埃及的撤销请求。
[15]ICSID公约第五十条.第五十三条。
[16]ICSID公约第五十二条。
[17]Guillemo Aguilar Alvarez,William W.Park..The New Face of Investment Arbitration:NAFTA Chapter11[J].Yale J.Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[18]ICSID.Possible Improvements of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration,para.4 and its Annex,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/highlights/DiscussionPaper.pdf,2008-12-3.
[19]魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:367
[20]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/SDMeyers-1stPartialAward.pdf,2008-11-3.
[21]Methanex Corp.v.United States of America,[EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Methanex-US-1st PartialAward-7Aug2002.pdf.p.25.2008-11-3.
[22][EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Firemans-Mexico-Jurisdiction-17Jul2003.pdf,p.45.2008-11-3.
[23][EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Metalclad-Mexico-Award-30Aug2000-Eng.pdf,p.59.2008-11-3.
[24]Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2002,19 USCS§3802(b)(3).
[25]Article 28:Conduct of the Arbitration 10 If a separate,multilateral agreement enters into force between the Parties that establishes an appellate body for purposes of reviewing awards rendered by tribunals constituted pursuant to international trade or investment arrangements to hear investment disputes,the Parties shall strive to reach an agreement that would have such appellate body review awards rendered under Article 34 in arbitrations commenced after the multilateral agreement enters into force between the Parties.
[26]以上条约文本均来自[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Section_Index.html 2008-11-30.
[27]不同仲裁庭对于间接征收、公正与公甲待遇等问题的解释不一致,已经成为国际投资法碎片化的主要表现之一,使得投资仲裁裁决的正当性日益受到质疑。参见Susan D.Franck.The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration:Privtizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions[J].Fordham Law Review,2005,(March):73.
[28]Update on MAI Negotiations[EB/OL].http://www.flora.org/flora/archive/mai-info/update01.htm,2008-05-26.
[29]OECD.Selected Issues On Dispute Settlement,Note by the Chairman,Negotiating Group on the Multilateral Agreement in Investment(MAI)[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng9812e.pdf,p.5,2008-05-26.
[30]Possible Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/iesid/arehives.htm,2008-05-22.
[31]魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:213,220.
[32]Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries[EB/OL].http://www.southcentre.org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpaper_feb05,doc,p.57-60,2008-05-28.
[33]ICSID公约第六十六条第一款规定:每次修改应在本公约的保存者向各缔约国发出关于所有缔约国已经批准、接受或核准该项修改的通知之后30天开始生效。
[34]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决国际投资争端国际中心机制研究”[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:261-262.
[35]G·R·德劳姆.跨同契约[M].Booklet F.1983:85-88:A·布鲁彻斯.解决投资争端国际中心经验[A].见S·鲁宾,R·尼尔森.国际投资争端:避免与解决[M].1984:84-85.
[36]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].2 ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289.
[37]ICSID公约第五十四条第三款。
[38]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:237.
[39]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):315-316.
[40]A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States[A].in A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subiects of Public and Private International Law[M].1995:232-239.
[41]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:216-217.
[42]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:374-384.
[43]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社2000:410-465.
[44]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社2000:384-399.
[45]NAFTA,art.1136(1).
[46]NAFTA,art.1136(4).
[47]NAFTA,art.1136(6).
[48]NAFTA,art.1136(5).
[49]Guiilermo Aguilar Alvarez,William W.Park,The New Face of Investment Arbitration:NAFTA Chapter11[J].Yale J.Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[50]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:351-361.
[51]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:249-266;M.Somarajah.The Settlement of Foereign Investment Disputes[M].2000:298-299.
[52]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:366-381.
[53]W·彼得.国际投资协议仲裁与重开谈判[M].1986:211.
[54]G·R.德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16.2,1982:74;沙赫特.更加非政治化[J].ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志,1987,(1):9.
[55]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:446-448.
[56]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1999,(2):342页。
[57]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:303-312.
[58]中华人民共和国最高人民法院.关于执行我国加入《联合国承认和执行外国仲裁裁决公约》的通知(第二条)[N].中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报,1987,(2):16.
[1]慕亚平.国际投资的法律制度[M].广州:广东人民出版社,1999:40.
[2]曹建明,周洪钧,王虎华.国际公法学[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:193-194.
[3]魏敏等.国际法概论[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1986:284.
[4]余劲松.国际投资法[M].北京:法律出版社,2007:216.
[5][英]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].王铁崖等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:12,32.
[6]孙南申.国际投资法[M].北京:中国人民出版社,2008:193.
[7]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:2,374-399,410-465.
[8]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:10,206,216-217.
[9]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007:285.
[10]姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编(下册)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:62-63.
[11]叶兴平.国际投资争端重要法律文献[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:623-624.
[12]全国人大常委会法制工作委员会民法室.中华人民共和国仲裁法全书[M].北京:法律出版社,1995.
[13]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:141.
[14]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:422.
[15]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:261-262,347.
[16]阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1981:41.
[17]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:19.
[18]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005:269.
[19]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999:441.
[20]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:249-266,303-312,351-381,446-448.
[21]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:237.
[1]刘琨,杜玉韬.论国际投资法的发展以及我国投资法的重构[J].前沿,2003,(7).
[2]林江.国际投资的法律保护[J].引进与咨询,1998,(2).
[3]詹晓宁.国际投资协定近期发展动向分析[N].国际商报,2005,9(23):7.
[4]余劲松,詹晓宁.国际投资协定的近期发展及对中国的影响[J].法学家,2006,(3):154.
[5]陈辉萍,黄玉梅.国际投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准的新发展[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:11-13.
[6]朱小菁.NAFTA投资仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:75.
[7]刘笋.双边投资条约中的绝对待遇标准评析[J].武汉大学学报,2003,(2):56.
[8]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究--由NAFTA实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005,(6):47.
[9]中华人民共和国最高人民法院.关于执行我国加入《联合国承认和执行外国仲裁裁决公约》的通知(第2条)[N].中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报,1987,(2):16.
[10]魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:213,220.
[11]魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:367.
[1]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].Cambridge University Press.1994:225,363-365.
[2]UNCTAD.Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement[R].New York and Geneva,2006:1.
[3]A.Redfern.M.Hunter.Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration[M].1991:39-44.
[4]S.J.Toope.Mixed International Arbitration:Studies in Arbitration Between States and Private Persons[M].Cambridge:Grotius Pub.Ltd.,1990.
[5]Kenneth J.Vandeveld.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].Boston:Law and Taxation Publishes,1992.
[6]M.Sornarajah.The Settlement of Foereign Investment Disputes[M]. 2000:298-299.
[7]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff publishers, 1993:90-92.115,119,121,125-130.
[8] J. D. Lew. Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration[M]. 1978:535.
[9]A. Broches. Bilateral Investment Protection Treaties and Arbitration of Investment Disputes[A]. in A. Broches.Selected Essays: World Bank, ICSID, and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M]. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995:179-187,232-239,449-451.
[10]J.Makarczyk. Principles of a New International Economic Order[M]. 1988:261.
[11]Ian Brownhe. Principles of Public International Law[M]. 1998:496-497.
[12]A. Roth.The Minium Standard of International Law Applied to Aliens[M]. 1949:99.
[13]Georg Schwarzenberger.International Law[M]. 1957:593.
[14]J. Paulsson. Investment Protection Provisions in Treaties[A].in International Chamber of Commerce, Investment Protection /La Protection de 1' Investissement[M].2000:9,22,130,136-147.
[15] R. Dolzer,M. Stevens.Bilateral Investment Treaties[M].The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff,1995:59.
[16]K.Vandevelde.United States Investment Treaties: Policy and Practice[M]. 1992:78,106.
[17]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A. W. Sijthoff, 1975:77,90,115.
[18] Lucy Reed.Jan Paulsson, Nigel Blackaby.Guide to ICSID arbitration[M]. The Hague, New York, Kluwer Law International, 2004.
[19] Howard Mann,Konrad von Moltke. NAFTA's Chapter 11 and the Environment[M]. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999.
[20] Todd Weiler.International Investment Law and Arbitration: Leading Cases from the ICSID, NAFTA, Bilateral Treaties and Customary International Law[M]. London :Cameron May, 2005.
[21]Todd Weiler. NAFTA Investment Law and Arbitration: Past Issues, Current Practice, Future Prospects[M]. Transnational Publisher, Inc.2004.
[22]Christoph H. Schreuer.The ICSID Convention: A Commentary[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2001:279-280,284.
[1] Antonio R. Parra. Provisions on the settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1997,12(2):287-288.288.
[2]Thomas W. Waelde.International Investment Under the1994 Energy Charter Treaty:Legal,Negotiating and Policy Implication for International Investors within Western and Commonwealth of Independent States/Eastern European Countries[J] .Journal of World Trade, 1995,12:6.
[3]David R. Haigh.Chapter 11-Private Party vs. Government, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Frankenstein or Safety Value? [J] .Can.-U.S. L.J. 2000,26:115, 132.
[4]Charles N. Brower, Lee A. Steven.Who Then Should Judge?: Developing the International Rule of Law Under NAFTA Chapter 11 [J] .Chi. J. Int'l L. 2001,(2): 193,196.
[5]William W. Park.Arbitration and the FISC: NAFTA's"Tax Veto" [J]. Chi. J. Int'l L.2001,(2): 231.
[6]George M. von Meheren. Claudia T. Salomon, Aspasia A. Paroutsas, Navigating through Investor-state Arbitrations-An Overview of Bilateral Investment Treaty Claims[J]. Dispute Resolution Journal, 2004, (2):38.
[7]Dana H. Freyer, Barry H. Garfinkel, Hamid GGharavi. Bilateral Investment Treaties and Arbitration[J]. Dispute Resolution Journal, 1998, (5):413-416.
[8]Jurgen Kurtz.The MFN standard and Foreign Investment: An Uneasy Fit? [J]. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2004, 5(6):866-867.
[9]Jeffery Atik.NAFTA Chapter 11 :A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques[J].Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law, 2005,(3):220.
[10]Dodge, William S. International Decision: Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico.ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1. [J]. American Journal of International Law,2002,95:910-919.
[11]Svetozer Hanek.The Experience of socialist Lawyers in Arbitration Held in Non Socialist countries on Litigation Between Business from East and West[J].International Business Lawyers 1982 ,(10): 147.
[12] W. Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review- FILJ, 2000,(Fall):371,374,380.
[13] John A.Westberg.Applicable Law, Expropriatory Takings and Compensation in Cases of Expropriation: ICSID and Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Case Law Compared[J]. ICSID Review-FILJ 1993,8(8).
[14] Ibrahim F.I. Shihata, Antonio R. Para.Applicable Substantive Law in Disputes Between States and Private Foreign Parties: the Case of Arbitration under the ICSID convention[J]. ICSID Review-FILJ, 1994, (9):189.
[15] P. F. Sutherland.The World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1979,28:394.
[16]Z. M. Eastman.NAFTA's Chapter 11: For Whose Benefit[J]. Journal of International Arbitration, 1999, (16):105.
[17]Giorgio Sacerdoti.Investment Arbitration Under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules[J].ICSID Review- FILJ, 2004, (Spring): 11-12.
[18]Antonio R,Parra, ICSID and Bilateral Investment Treaties[J].News from ICSID,2000, 17(1):7.
[19] J Paulsson.ICSID's Achievements and Prospects[J]. ICSID Rev - FILJ.1991,6:380.
[20] O.E.Garc(?)a-Bol(?)var.The Teleology of International Investment Law: The Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6:751-771.
[21] J.Kurtz.The MFN Standard and Foreign Investment: An Uneasy Fit? [J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2004, 5:870-871.
[22] R.Teitelbaum.Who's Afraid of Maffezini? Recent Developments in the Interpretation of Most Favored Clauses[J].Journal of International Arbitration, 2005,22(3):225-226.
[23] R. Dolzer,T. Myers, After Tecmed: Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 2004,19:59.
[24] Dana H. Freyer, David Herlihy.Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration: Just How"Favored"is"Most-Favored"?[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2005, 20(1):61-62.
[25] Amr A. shalakany, Arbitration and the Third World: A Plea for Reassessing Bias under the Specter of Neoliberalism[J].Harvard International Law Journal, 2000, 41:419-424.
[26] Jonathan Fried.Globalization and International Law-Some Thoughts for Citizens and States[J]. Queen's Law Journal 1997, 23 :259,274.
[27] Howard Mann.NAFAT and the Environment: Lessons for the Future[J]. Tulane Environmental Law Journal 2000,13:408.
[28] Ian A. Laird.NAFTA Chapter11: Betrayal, Shock And Outrage-Recent Developments in Nafta Article 1105[J]. Asper Rev. Int' 1 Bus.& Trade L.,2003,(3):213.
[29] M.Reisman.The Regime for Lacunae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 2000, 15.
[30] Andrew E.L.Tucker.Energy Charter Treaty and"Compulsory" International State/Investor Arbitration[J].Leiden Journal of International Law, 1998, 3:525.
[31] A. Parra.Applicable Substantive Law in ICSID Arbitrations Initiated Under Investment Treaties[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 2001,16:20.
[32] William W. Park. The Lex Loci Arbiti, and International Commercial Arbitration[J]. International and Comparative Law Qurterly, 1983, 32:23.
[33] J.Paulsson.Arbitration Unbound: Award Detached from the Law of Its Country of Origin[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1981,30:358.
[34] White.Expropriations of the Libyan Oil Concessions: Two Conflicting International Arbitrations[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1981,30:1,7.
[35] L. Yves Fortier, Stephen L. Drymer.Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment: I Know It When I See It, or Caveat Investor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 2004,19(2):314-315.
[36] Rudolf Dolzer. Indirect Expropriation: New Development?[J].New York University Enviromental Law Journal, 2002,11:78-79.
[37] Stephen Fietta. The "Legitimate Expectation'Trinciple under Article 1105 NAFTA-International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v. The United Mexican States[J]. The Journal of World Investment and Trade, 2006, 7(3):425.
[38] Bjφrn Kunoy.Developments in Indirect Expropriation Case Law in ICSID Transnational Arbitration[J]. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6(3):472.
[39] Corlos E. Alfaro,Pedro M. Lorenti.The Growing Opposition of Argentina to ICSID Arbitral Tribunals- A Conflict between International and Domestic Law?[J].The Journal of World Trade and Investment, 2005. 6(3).
[40] Francisco Orrego Vicuna.Regulatory Expropriations in International Law: Carlos Calvo, Honorary NAFTA Citizen[J].New York University Environmental Law Journal,2002,11:23.
[41] Michael G Parisi.Moving Toward Transparency? An Examination of Regulatory Taking[J].Emory International Law Review, 2005, 19:388.
[42] Barton Legum.Lessons Learned from the NAFTA: The New Generation of U.S.Investment Treaty Arbitration Provisions[J].ICSID-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004, 19(2):344-348.
[43] Patrick G Foy, Robert J.C, Deane. Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties: Recent Developments under Chapterl 1 of the North American Free Trade Agreement[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,16:302,317.
[44] F.A.Mann, British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,52:241.
[45] Charles Brower.Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA: the Empire Strikes Back[J]. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,2001,40:56.
[46] Stephen Vasciannie. The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].the British Yearbook of International Law, 1999,70:116-117,212.
[47] Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Law[J]The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6(2):305.
[48] Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez, William W. Park.The New Face of Investment Arbitration: NAFTA Chapter 11[J]. Yale J. Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[49] Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention: Binding Force, Finality, Reorganization, Enforcement, Execution[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289,315-316.
[50] Susan D. Franck.The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privtizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions [J].Fordham Law Review,2005,(March):73.
[51] Georges R.Delaume.The Finality of Arbitrations Involving States: Recent Development[J].Arbitration International, 1989, 5:3.
[52] Aron Broches.Observations on the Finality of ICSID Awards[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991, 6(2):328.
[53]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[54]J.C.Thomas.Reflections on Article 1105 of NAFTA:History,State Practice and the Influence of Commentators[J].ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2002,17(1):44.
[55]David A.Gantz.The Evolution of FTA Investment Provisions:From NAFTA to the United States -Chile Free Trade Agreement[J].19 Am.U.Int' l L.Rev.2004,19:679,743-746.
[1]UNCTAD.Bilateral Investment Treates,1959-1999,Untied Nations2000-2006,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/iia,2008-7-9.
[2][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/vivendi_annul.pdf,2008-5-30.
[3]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabeticai_list.htm,2008-5-30
[4]National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-5-30
[5]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,November13,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org.2008-5-30
[6]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5 -30
[7]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAwar d.doc,2008-5-30.
[8][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/joy-mining-award.pdf,2008-5-30.
[9][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf,2008-5-30.
[10][EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/disp/ethyl_archive-en.asp,2008-5-30.
[11]UNCTAD,2006World Investment Report[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir2006_fas_en.pdf,2008-9-1.
[12]德国-巴基斯坦BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/germany_pakistan.pdf, 2008-11-1.
[13]中国-德国BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/china_germany.pdf,2008-11-1.
[14][EB/OL].http://naftaclaims.com/Disputes/USA/Loewen/LoewenFinalAward.pdf,2008-10-5.
[15]John Dugard,First Report on Diplomatic Protection,U.N.GAOR International Law Commission,52d Sess.,P16,U.N.Doc.A/CN.4/506(2000),[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/law/ilc/sessions/52/52docs.htm,2008-11-28.
[16]Todd Weiler.Newsletter Commentary on July 31st Commission Statement,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[17]Statements of the NAFTA Free Trade Commission on the operation of Chapter11,October,7,2003,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[18]Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions(NAFTA Free Trade Commission,July31,2001 ),[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-Interpr-en.asp,2008-8-6.
[19]U.S.A-Uruguay BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/BIT/Uruguay/asset_upload_file748_9005.pdf,2008-11-3.
[20]Exchange of Letters on Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Singapore_FTA/Final_Texts/a sset_upload_file58_4058.pdf,2008-11-3.
[21]U.S.A-Chile FTA,Annex10-D,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Chile_F TA/Final_Texts/asset_upload_file4004.pdf,2008-11-3.
[22]U.S.A-Australia FTA,Annex11-B,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilaterai/Australi a_FTA/Final_Texts/asset_upload_file 148_5168.pdf,2008-11-3.
[23]U.S.A-The Central America-Dominican Republic FTA,Chapter Ten,Annex10-C,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/CAFTA /CAFTA-DR_Final_Texts/asset_upload_file328_4718.pdf,2008-11-3
[24]U.S.A 2004 BIT Model,Annex B-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/USmodelbitnov04.pdf,2008-11-3.
[25]Canada 2004 BIT Model,Annex B.13(1)-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/Canadian2004-FIPA-model -en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[26]Stephen Fietta.Expropriation and Fair and Equitable Standard(BIICL Fifth Investment Treaty Conference),p.1,[EB/OL].http://www.biici.org,2008-11-3.
[27]Thoms Walde.Separate Opinion of the Final Award of international Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v.Mexico,para.37,[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_separate_opinion.pdf,2008-12-1.
[28]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oeed.org/dataoeed/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-28.
[29]UNCTAD.Fair and Equitable Treatment,paras.15-16.[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/psiteiitdllv3.en.pdf,2008-11-30.
[30]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-25.
[31]ICSID.Possible Improvements of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration,para.4and its Annex,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/highlights/DiscussionPaper.pdf,2008-12-3.
[32]Update on MAI Negotiations[EB/OL].http://www,flora.org/flora/archive/mai-info/update01.htm,2008-05-26.
[33]OECD.Seleeted Issues On Dispute settlement,Note by the Chairman,Negotiating Group on the Multilateral Agreement in Investment(MAI)[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng9812e,pdf,p.5,2008-05-26.
[34]Possible Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/archives.htm,2008-05-22.
[35]Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries[EB/OL].http://www.southeentre.org/tadp_webpage/researeh_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpaper_feb05.doe,2008-05-28.
[36]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[37]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[38]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[39]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[40]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[41]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[1]郭杰论.国际投资争议解决中东道国当地救济的发展趋势[D].郑州:郑州大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[2]张美均.中国双边投资条约研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2004.
[3]江晓春.解决投资争议国际中心管辖权扩大倾向研究[D].上海:华东政法学院硕士学位论文,2006.
[4]朱小菁.NAFTA公正与公平待遇条款研究[D].厦门:厦门大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[5]曾红.国际投资法上的征收问题初探[D].深圳:深圳大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[6]陈荣.论国际投资争端中的仲裁[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[7]陈为.北美自由贸易区协议中投资者一国家争端解决机制研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[8]马迅.《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章争议解决机制研究[D].武汉:武汉大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[9]夏兰.关于投资者与国家间投资争端解决机制的理论与发展[D].深圳:深圳大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[10]马凌.国际投资争端解决机制的构建研究[D].天津:天津财经大学硕士学位论文,2005年.
[2]M. Sornarajah. The Settlement of Foreign Investment Disputes[M]. Kluwer Law International,2000; Lucy Reed, Jan Paulsson, Nigel Blackaby.Guide to ICSID arbitration[M]. The Hague, New York, Kluwer Law International, 2004.
[3] Howard Mann & Konrad von Moltke. NAFTA's Chapter 11 and the Environment[M].International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999.
[4] Todd Weiler.Intemational Investment Law and Arbitration: Leading Cases from the ICSID,NAFTA, Bilateral Treaties and Customary International Law[M]. London : Cameron May, 2005;Todd Weiler. NAFTA Investment Law and Arbitration: Past Issues, Current Practice, Future Prospects[M]. Transnational Publisher, Inc.2004.
[1]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[2]同上.
[3]同上.
[4]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[5]目前,我国与31个国家和地区进行14个自由贸易区谈判、商签和联合研究工作,已经有7个自由贸易协定生效实施了。其中与香港、澳门签署《更紧密经贸关系安排》及5个补充协议;与东盟签署自由贸易区《货物贸易协议》和《服务贸易协议》,完成投资淡判:与巴基斯坦签署《自由贸易协定》和《服务贸易协定》:与新加坡、新西兰签署《自由贸易协定》;与智利签署《自由贸易协定》和《自由贸易区服务贸易协定》,正开展投资谈判;与秘鲁结束自由贸易谈判;推进与与哥斯达黎加、澳大利亚、冰岛、挪威、海湾合作委员会(包括沙特阿拉伯、科威特、阿联酋、阿曼、卡塔尔和巴林6国)的自由贸易协定谈判;与南部非洲关税同盟启动了自由贸易谈判;完成了与印度的区域贸易安排联合研究,正在开展与韩国的自由贸易区联合研究,还在推进《亚太贸易协定》第四轮谈判,2009年下半年将启动与瑞士的自贸区联合研究。
[6]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[7]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[8]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[9]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[10]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aartiele/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[1]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[2]Jeswald W.Salacuse,Nichloas P.Sullivan.Do BITs Really Work?:An Evaluation of Bilateral Investment Treaties and Their Grand Bargain[J].Harvard International Law Journal.2005,(46):70.
[3]这项协议涵盖来自文莱、印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡及泰国的投资者在这些国家领域内的投资。
[4]这项协议涵盖来自加拿大、墨西哥及美困的投资者在这些国家领域内的投资。
[5]ECT涵盖来自47个缔约国(包括所有欧洲国家及前苏联)的投资者在这些国家能源领域内的投资。
[6]刘琨.杜玉韬.论国际投资法的发展以及我国投资法的重构[J].前沿.2003.(7).
[7]Antonio R.Parra.Provisions on the settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws,Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1997,12,(2):257-288.
[8]慕亚平.国际投资的法律制度[M].广州:广东人民出版社,1999:40.
[9]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].CambridgeUniversity Press.1994:363-365.
[10]林江.国际投资的法律保护[J].引进与咨询,1998,(2).
[11]BIT的数量在二十世纪90年代比80年代增长了5倍,从80年代末的385个到90年代末的1857个。同时,以前的BIT主要是在发达国家与发展中国家间签订的,而近十多年来,在发展中国家和中东欧国家间签订的BIT数量也急剧增加,从80年代末的63个发展到90年代末的833个。UNCTAD.Bilateral Investment Treates,1959-1999.EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[12]Thomas W.Waelde.International Investment Under the 1994 Energy Charter Treaty:Legal,Negotiating and Policy Implication for International Investors within Western and Commonwealth of Independent States/Eastern European Countries[J].Journal of World Trade,1995,12:6.
[13]曹建明,周洪钧,王虎华.国际公法学[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:193-194.
[13]魏敏等.国际法概论[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1986:284.
[14]余劲松.国际投资法[M].北京:法律出版社,2007:216.
[15][英]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].王铁崖等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:32.
[16]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].CambridgeUniversity Press.1994:225.
[17]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic of Sri Lanka,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3,Fina I Award,June 27,1990,[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 1991(6):526.
[18]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/does/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[19]AES Summit Generation Ltd v.Republic of Hungary,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/4,该姚依林是根据ECT提交的首个案件,现已裁决。
[20]A.Redfern,M.Hunter.Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration[M].1991:39-44.
[21]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:2.
[22]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:10.
[23]William W.Park.Arbitration and the FISC:NAFTA's "Tax Veto"[J].Chi.J.Int'l L.2001,(2):231.
[24]Charles N.Brower & Lee A.Steven.Who Then Should Judge?:Developing the International Rule of Law Under NAFTA Chapter 11[J].Chi.J.Int'l L.2001,(2):193,196.
[26]这里的国家及国家机构主要是指可以行使国家公共管理权力的机关,包括某些国家中行使管理权力的国家企业。
[27]S.J.Toope.Mixed International Arbitration:Studies in Arbitration Between States and Private Persons[M].Cambridge:Grotius Pub.Ltd.,1990.
[28]孙南中.国际投资法[M].北京:中国人民出版社,2008:193.
[29]David R.Haigh.Chapter 11-Private Party vs.Government,Investor-State Dispute Settlement:Frankenstein or Safety Value?[J].Can.-U.S.L.J.,2000,26:115,132.
[29]James Mcilroy.Canada' s New Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement-Two Steps Forward.One Sten Back? The Journal of World Investment & Trade[J|.2004.5(4):643.
[31]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[32]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[32]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1985:379.
[33]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[34]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3 - 1.
[35]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[36]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[57]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[58]Kenneth J.Vandeveld.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].Boston:Law and Taxation Publishes,1992.
[59]根据ICSID公约第二十五条第一款和第三款的规定,每一缔约国得自由把特定的自认为合格的公共实体指派到ICSID作为ICSID程序当事人。被指派的公共实体所作的接受ICSID 管辖的同意,还须经该缔约国批准,除非该缔约国通知ICSID不需要这种批准。
[60]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.41.
[61]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.51.
[62]George M.von Meheren,Claudia T.Salomon,Aspasia A.Paroutsas.Navigating through Investor-state Arbitrations-An Overview of Bilateral Investment Treaty Claims[J].Dispute Resolution Journal,2004,(4):38.
[63]Dana H.Freyer,Barry H.Garfinkel,Hamid G.Gharavi.Bilateral Investment Treaties and Arbitration[J].Dispute Resolution Journal,1998,(5):413-416.
[64]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007:285.
[65]绝大多数国际投资协定都规定外国投资者在东道国享有对其财产的所有权、企业控制权和管理经营权、外汇自由兑换与汇出权等权利。
[66]《中华人民共和国宪法》第十八条第二款规定:“在中国境内的外国企业和其他外国经济组织以及中外合资经营的企业,都必须遵守中华人民共和国的法律。他们的合法的权利和利益受中华人民共和国法律的保护。”
[67]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.79.
[68]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Award of the Triunal,November 21,2000,p.80-81.
[69]Vivendi Universal v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulent,July 3,2002,p.115.[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/vivendi_annul.pdf,2008-5-30.
[70]ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1.
[71]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003.
[72]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[73]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August 30,2000,paras,75-76.
[74]Jurgen Kurtz.The MFN standard and Foreign Investment:An Uneasy Fit?[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2004,5(6):866-867.
[75]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,lCSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.38-64.
[76]Camuzzi International S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/2,Decision on Object ions to Jurisdiction of May 11,2005.
[77]Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and Italstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13,Decision of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction of November29,2004,Award of January31,2006.
[78]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of February8,2005.
[79]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.
[80]Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and lnteragua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006.
[81]Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of Junel 7,2005.
[82]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Award of the Tribunal of December 16,2002.
[83]ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1,Award of the Tribunal of January 9,2003.
[84]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003.
[85]Tecnicas Medioambientales Teemed,S.A.v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award of the Tribunal of May 29,2003.
[86]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.1.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003,International Legal Materials,2003,42:540-559;National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-5-30.
[87]Robert Azinian and others v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/2,Award,1November 1999.
[88]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August30,2000,paras.75-76.
[89]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,Novemberl 3,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5-30.
[90]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5-30.
[91]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,[J].I.L.M.2003,811(42):128.
[92]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003,[J].I.L.M.2004,133(43):154.
[93]MTD Equity Sdn.Bhd.& MTD Chile S.A.v.Chile,Final Award,May25,2004,paras.112-113.
[94]Occidental Exploration and Production Company v.The Republic of Ecuador,Final Award,July 1,2004,p.183.
[95]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,Mayl2,2005,p274.
[96]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,p.98.
[97]Alex Genin v.Republic of Estonia,Award,June25,2001,para.371.
[98]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[99]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[100]Pope & Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[101]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-5-30.
[102]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,para.107.
[103]Eudoro A.Olguin v.Republic of Paraguay,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/5,Award of July26,2001,para.84,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/cases/Oigun-arawd-en.pdf,2008-5-30.
[104]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.ez/statie/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,2008-5-30.
[105]CMS Gas Transmission Co.v.Argentine Republic,Award,2005,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8.
[106]Joy Mining Mach.Ltd.v.Egypt,Award on Jurisdiction,2004,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,[EB/OL].http://www.woridbank.org/icsid/cases/joy-mining-award.pdf,2008-5-30.
[107]Societe Generai de Surveillance S.A.v.Pakistan,Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction,2003,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/13,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf,2008-5-30.
[108]Societe General de Surveillance S.A.v.Philippines,Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction,2004,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/6.
[109]http://www.naftalaw.org/terminal.htm,2008-5-30.
[110]Jeffery Atik,NAFTA Chapter 11:A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques[J].Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law,2005,(3):220.
[111]詹晓宁.国际投资协定近期发展动向分析[N].国际商报,2005,9(23):7.
[112]Dodge,William S.International Decision:Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico.ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1.40[J].American Journal of International Law,2002,95:910-919.
[113]http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/disp/ethyl_archive-en.asp,2008-5-30.
[1]ICSID.ICSID Annual Report 2008[EB/OL].http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=ICSIDPublicationsRH &actionVal=ViewAnnualReports&year=2008-Eng,2009-2-5.截至2007年6月,共有144个国家交存了批准书,但玻利维亚在2008财年退出了ICSID公约,现缔约方为143个。
[2]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[3]Agreement on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments,May25,1995,Bolivia-Ecuador,art.Ⅸ.
[3]参见http//www.pca-cpa.org,2008-5-30.
[4]UNCTAD,Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement[R].New York and Geneva,2006:1.
[5]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:19.
[6]所谓中立地位,在这里不是指政治上的意义,而只是指该仲裁机构不在当事人任何一方国内。 Svetozer Hanek.The Experience of socialist Lawyers in Arbitration Held in Non Socialist countries on Litigation Between Business from East and West[J].International Business Lawyers,1982,(10):147.
[7]A·布鲁彻斯.解决投资争端国际中心的经验[A].见S.鲁宾,R.尼尔森.国际投资争端:避免与解决[M].1985:83.
[8]参见“《ICSID示范条款》第三条”,姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编(下册)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:62.
[9]G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984(1):109:A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:354.
[10]参见ICSID公约第二十五条第三款的规定。
[11]ICSID.Contracting States and measures taken by them for the purpose of the Convention,Part C[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/ICSID Publication,2008-10-8.
[12]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:356.
[13]例如1930年《关于国籍法冲突若干问题的海牙公约》第一条规定:“各国依其国内法判定何者为其国民。此项法律若符合国际公约、国际习惯以及一般承认关于国籍的法律原则,则其他国家应予承认。”即便如此,对于哪些属于“国际习惯以及一般承认关于国籍的法律原则”,也难以判断。
[14]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:39.
[15]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:359.
[16]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:360.
[17]G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984(1):112;
P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:384.
[18]P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:385.
[19]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:23.
[20]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:24-27;
P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:385.
[21]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第9页。
[22]姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:63.
[23]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第9页。
[24]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:34;
G·R·德劳姆.ICSID仲裁实践方而的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984,(1):116-117.
[25]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:34-35.
[26]沙赫特.更加非政治化[J].ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志,1986,(1):4;
G·R·德劳姆.ICSID 仲裁实践方面的考虑[J].国际仲裁杂志,1984,(1):104.
[27]ICSID.执行董事会报告[R].ICSID/2,英文版,第8页。
[28]P·F·萨瑟兰.世界银行公约[J].国际法与比较法季刊,1979,28:380.
[29]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:192.
[30]这7个国家是:牙买加、圭亚那、巴布新几内亚、沙特阿拉伯、上耳其、以色列和中国。其中,圭亚那和以色列分别于1987年和1991年撤回了通知。ICSID.Contracting States and measures taken by them for the purpose of the Convention,Part D[EB/OL].http://www.woridbank.org/icsid/ICSID Publication,2008-10-8.
[31]ICSID.关于管理调解、仲裁和调查事实的附加程序,ICSID/11,[EB/OL].http://www.worlddbank.org/icsid/,2008-11-1.
[32]]德国-巴基斯坦BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iiajdocs/bits/germany_pakistan.pdf,2008-11-1.
[33]中国-德国BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/china_germany.pdf,2008-11-1.
[34]指在最惠国待遇和国民待遇之间待遇水平不同的情况下,缔约国应给予对方投资者更为优惠的那种待遇。
[35]Metalclad Corporation v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1.
[36]叶兴平.国际投资争端重要法律文献[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:623-624.
[37]全国人大常委会法制工作委员会民法室.中华人民共和国仲裁法全书[M].北京:法律出版社,1995.
[38]例如瑞典分别与马来西亚和南斯拉夫签订的BIT。
[39]例如荷兰分别与肯尼亚、塞内加尔和南斯拉夫签订的BIT。
[39]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet15,1982,2:15.
[40]例如荷兰分别与印度尼西亚、马来西亚、摩洛哥、科特迪瓦、新加坡、韩国和埃及签订的BIT:英国与印度尼西亚、菲律宾,以及日本与埃及之间的BIT。
[41]例如英国分别与孟加拉、埃及、约旦、韩国、马来西亚、巴拉圭、新加坡、斯里兰卡签订的BIT;以及斯里兰卡与新加坡、韩国签订的BIT。
[42]A.Broches.Bilateral Investment Protection Treaties and Arbitration of Investment Disputes[A].in:A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].1995:449-451.
[43]AAPL v.Sri Lank,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3.
[44]ICSID.ICSID Reports,1993,(4):250-254.
[45]Z.M.Eastman.NAFTA's Chapter 11:For Whose Benefit[J].Journal of International Arbitration,1999,(16):105.
[46]Giorgio Sacerdoti.Investment Arbitration Under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2004,Spring:11-12;
Antonio R.Parra.ICSID and Bilateral Investment Treaties[J].News from ICSID,2000,17(1):7.
[47]J.Makarczyk.Prineilples of a New International Economic Order[M].1988:261.
[48]如德国-以色列BIT第一条第三款b项。
[49]如丹麦-印度尼西亚BIT第一条。
[50]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Interim Decision on Preliminary Jurisdictional Issues,December6,2000.本案涉案美国公民在墨西哥拥有永久居所,墨西哥以双重国籍为由抗辩了管辖权。仲裁庭驳回了基于一般国际法提出的异议,认为居所在确定公民身份方面仅有辅助性的功能,见[J].International Legal Materials,2001,40:615.
[51]ICSID Repots,1993,(1):396.
[52]Christoph H.Schreuer.The ICSID Convention:A Commentary[J].Cambridge University Press,2001:279-280.
[53]Christoph H.Schreuer.The ICSID Convention:A Commentary[J].Cambridge University Press,2001:284.
[54]Moshe Hirsch.Arbitration Mechanism of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J].Kluwer Academic Publishers.1993:90-92.
[55]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:863-885.
[56]The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Decision of the Arbitral Tribunal,June26,2003[EB/OL].http://naftaclaims.com/Disputes/USA/Loewen/LoewenFinalAward.pdf,2008-10-5.
[57]有关国际条约对此作出了例外规定的情况除外,例如许多人权保护条约中都允许国家在特定情况下对非本国公民采取保护措施。
[58]Ian Brownhe,Principles of Public International Law[M].1998:496-497.
[59]I Oppenheim's International Law 153,at 512(R.Jennings&A.Watts eds.,9~(th)ed.1992).
[60]Georg Schwarzenberger,Intematonal Law[M].1957:593.
[61]Barcelona Traction,Light and Power Co.(Belg.v.Spain),1970 I.C.J.3,202-03(Feb.5)(separate opinion of Judge Jessup).
[62]John Dugard.First Report on Diplomatic Protection,U.N.GAOR International Law Commission,52d Sess.,P16,U.N.Doc.A/CN.4/506(2000),[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/law/ilc/sessions/52/52docs.htm,2008-11-28.
[63]Edwin Borchard.Diplomtic Protection of Citizens Abroad[M].1915:34.
[64]J.Paulsson.ICSID's Achievements and Prospects[J].ICSID Rev.-FILJ.1991,(6):380
[65]Fedax N.V.v.Republic of Venezuela,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/3.
[66]Fedax N.V.v.Republic of Venezuela,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/3,Decision of the Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.34-35.
[67]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4.
[68]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.63-65.
[69]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.72-74.
[70]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.81-83.
[71]Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka,A.S.v.The Slovak Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/4,Decision of The Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction,paras.77.
[72]S.D.Myer Inc.v.Government of Canada,First Partial Award,November 13,2000.
[73]Pope & Talbot v.Government of Canada,Interim Award,June 26,2000.
[74]Mihaly International Corporation v.Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.ICSID Case No.ARB/00/2,Award,Para.41.
[75]Mihaly International Corporation v.Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.ICSID Case No.ARB/00/2,Award,Para.49.
[76]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction.
[77]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction,Para.44.
[78]相关资产或交易要构成ICSID公约第二十五条规定的投资,必须满足的五项要求是:具有一定的持续期间,具有预期利润或收入,承担一定的风险,数额较大,能够促进东道国的解决发展。见Joy Mining Machinery Limited v.The Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/11,Award on Jurisdiction,Para.54.
[79]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:141.
[80]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.
[81]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,lCSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.19.
[82]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.36.
[83]第一点理由已在上文阐述,即投资者不符合国籍继续要求。
[84]Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co.S.A.v.Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/6,Award.para.71.
[85]Alex Genin,Eastern Credit Limited,lnc.and A.S.Baltoil v.The Republic of Estonia,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/2,Award.
[86]第一条.第十一条是有关投资者与东道国之间的争端解决的规定。
[87]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.38-64.
[88]Camuzzi International S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/2,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of May11,2005;Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and ltalstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13,Decision of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction of November29,2004,Award of January31,2006;Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of FebruaryS,2005;Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June17,2005.
[89]Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/99/1,Award of the Tribunal of December 16,2002;ADF Group Inc.v.United States of America,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/1,Award of the Tribunal of January 9,2003;The Loewen Group v.United States,ICSID,No.ARB(AF)/98/3,Award of the Tribunal of June26,2003;Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed,S.A.v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award of the Tribunal of May 29,2003.
[90]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.I.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003,International Legal Materials,Vol.42,2003,paras.540-559;National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-11-18.
[91]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24.在 Plama案中,塞浦路斯投资者Plama收购了保加利亚的一家炼油公司。Plama诉称,保加利亚政府故意采取的各种刁难措施构成了对该公司的“间接征收”。就此,Plama向ICSID提起仲裁的依据之一是:1987年保加利亚与塞浦路斯BIT(以下简称《保塞条约》)第四条规定,有关征收补偿额的争端只能提交特设仲裁庭仲裁,而且事先必须经过东道国常规的行政和司法救济程序。然而,此前保加利亚与芬兰BIT(以下简称《保芬条约》)对提交ICSID仲裁的征收争端没有限定范围,且规定的条件相当宽松。于是,Plama援用《保塞条约》第三条规定的最惠国待遇条款,要求享有《保芬条约》中该项关于争端解决程序事项的更优惠待遇。2005年ICSID仲裁庭作出裁决,否定了Plama基于最惠国待遇的该项管辖权请求。针对《保塞条约》中的最惠国待遇条款,该案裁决指出:“不能推定缔约各方已经同意,(争端解决)条款能够通过嵌入在完全不同境况下谈判形成的其他条约之争端解决条款,而使其变大。”
[92]Salini Costruttori S.p.A.and Italstrade S.p.A.v.The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/13.
[93]《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条第一款。
[94]《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条第二款。
[95]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.paras.54-56.
[96]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.60.
[97]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.
[98]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.83-86.
[99]National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,para.93.2008-11-19.
[100]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.83-86;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June17,2005,para.30;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006,para.56.
[101]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.paras.80-81;Suez,sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A.and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/17,Decision on Jurisdiction of May 16,2006,para.57.
[102]O.E.Gareia-Bolivar.The Teleology of International Investment Law:The Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment &Trade,2005,6:751-771.
[103]J.Kurtz.The MFN Standard and Foreign Investment:An Uneasy Fit?[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2004,5:870-871.
[104]R.Teitelbaum.Who's Afraid of Maffezini? Recent Developments in the Interpretation of Most Favored Clauses[J].Journal of International Arbitration,2005,22(3):225-226.
[105]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of January25,2000.para.42.
[106]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Decision on Objections to Jurisdietion of January25,2000.para.64.
[107]Siemens,AG v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/02/8,Decision on Jurisdiction of August3,2004.para.120;Gas Natural SDG,S.A.v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/10,Decision of the Tribunal on Preliminary Questions on Jurisdiction of June 17,2005,para.28.
[108]ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal:Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte Ltd.V.Government of the Union of Myanmar,ASEAN.I.D.Case,No.ARB/01/01,Award of March 31,2003[J].International Legal Materials,Vol.2003,42:83.
[109]R.Dolzer & T.Myers.After Tecmed:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19:59.
[110]Dana H.Freyer,David Herlihy.Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How"Favored"is"Most-Favored"?[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2005,20(1):61-62.
[111]Amr A.shalakany.Arbitration and the Third World:A Plea for Reassessing Bias under the Specter of Neoliberalism[J].Harvard International Law Journal,2000,41:419-424.
[112]Plama Consortium Limited v.Republic of Bulgaria,ICSID Case No.ARB/03/24,Decision on Jurisdiction of February8,2005.
[113]数据根据国家商务部网站资料整理。
[114]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁[M].上海:复且大学出版社,2001:6.
[115]这13个BIT的缔约另一方分别是:韩国、立陶宛、智利、冰岛、秘鲁、摩洛哥、以色列、南斯拉夫、沙特阿拉伯、加蓬、喀麦隆、马其顿、也门。其中,中国-喀麦隆BIT已经废止。
[116]这28个BIT的缔约另一方分别是:巴巴多斯、刚果(布)、博茨瓦纳、塞浦路斯、塞拉利昂、莫桑比克、肯尼亚、荷兰、缅甸、波黑、特立尼达和多巴哥、科特迪瓦、圭亚那、德国、贝宁、拉脱维亚、乌干达、约旦、芬兰、朝鲜、捷克、西班牙、葡葡牙、瓦努阿图、俄罗斯、印度、吉布提、突尼斯。
[117]即1999年中国-巴林BIT,仅就“有关征收补偿额的争议”接受ICSID仲裁管辖权。
[118]余劲松,詹晓宁.国际投资协定的近期发展及对中国的影响[J].法学家,2006,(3):154.
[119]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[120]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[121]Jonathan Fried.Globalization and International Law-Some Thoughts for Citizens and States[J].Queen's Law Journal 1997,(23):259,274.
[122]Howard Mann.NAFAT and the Environment:Lessons for the Future[J].Tulane Environmental Law Journal 2000,(13):408.
[123]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.html,2009-3 -2.
[124]1990年2月9日由当时的驻美大使朱启桢代表中国政府签署参加ICSID公约。
[125]例如,我国BIT范本中关于投资者的定义规定,投资者包括自然人和法人。法人包括根据缔约国任何一方的法律设立或者组建和具有住所的公司、社团、合伙和其他组织。
[126]例如,美国2004年的BIT范本关于投资者的定义条款规定,“缔约国一方的投资者”是指试图投资、正在投资或者已经投资的该缔约国一方本身、国有企业或者缔约国一方的自然人或企业:缔约国一方的企业,是指根据缔约国一方的法律组建或者成立的企业,或者位于缔约国一方境内并在缔约国一方境内从事业务活动的上述企业的分支机构。加拿大2004年BIT范本关于投资者的定义条款规定,就加拿大一方而言,“缔约国一方的投资者”是指,试图投资、正在投资或者已经投资的加拿大国家、加拿大国有企业或者加拿大的企业或者国民;加拿大的企业是指,根据缔约国一方的法律组建或者成立的企业,或者位于缔约国一方境内并在缔约国一方境内从事业务活动的上述企业的分支机构。显然,两者关于投资者的定义十分相近。
[127]即上文提到的联合国国际法委员会1978年《关于最惠国条款的规定》(草案)第十条的规定:基础条约规定了最惠国条款:授予国在第三方条约中给予第三国的特定待遇属于基础条约最惠国条款的主题范畴;授予国在第三方条约中给予第三国的特定待遇优于其在基础条约中给予受惠国的相同主题待遇;受惠国的得以依据最惠国条款取得权利的与其有确定关系的人或事,不但其类型与从上述特定待遇中受益的与第三国有确定关系的人或事的类型相同,而且其与受惠国的关系也与从上述特定待遇中受益的人或事与该第三国的关系相同。
[128]相应的BIT的缔约另一方包括立陶宛(1993年)、智利(1994年)、秘鲁(1994年)、摩洛哥(1995年)、加蓬(1997年)、也门(1998年)、巴林(1999年)。这些BIT都未就“与投资有关的活动”的含义或者范围进行界定。
[129]相应的BIT的缔约另一方包括冰岛(1994年)、以色列(1995年)。
[130]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为南斯拉夫(1995年)。
[131]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为沙特阿拉伯(1996年)。
[132]相应的BIT的缔约另一方为马其顿(1997年)。
[1]White.Expropriations of the Libyan Oil Concessions:Two Conflicting International Arbitrations[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1981,30:7.
[2]J A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:385.
[3]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,19822:41-43.
[4]这些规则主要规定在公约第三十六条.六十三条。
[5]例如关于提交仲裁申请和登记的第三十六条是不允许变更的,而关于仲裁员任命的第三十七条则允许变更。
[6]现行适用的是2002年9月修订,自2003年1月开始生效的《ICSID仲裁程序规则》。
[7]ICSID公约的目标在于平衡东道国和投资者双方的利益,使东道国免受投资者母国的不正当干预,使投资者免受东道国主权豁免的影响。因此,“中立的国际法庭”是双方利益平衡的结果。
[8]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:19.
[9]J.D.Lew.Applieable Law in International Commercial Arbitration[M].1978:535.
[10]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:115.
[11]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:206.
[12]William W.Park.The Lex Loci Arbiti,and International Commercial Arbitration[J].International and Comparative Law Qurterly,1983,32:23.
[13]J.Paulsson.Arbitration Unbound:Award Detached from the Law of Its Country of Origin[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly,1981,30:358.
[14]《1923年关于仲裁条款的议定书》第二条规定,仲裁程序受当事人共同意志和仲裁地法的支配。
[15]关于各国国内法的有关规定,参见程德钧、王生长.涉外仲裁与法律(第一辑1992年版)、(第二辑1994年版)。关于各国国内有关的司法判例,参见韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:412-420.
[16]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:12.
[17]主要是各种有关承认和执行仲裁裁决的公约和条约,尤其重要的是1958年《纽约公约》。
[18]阿库斯特认为,一般法律原则是国际上公认的国际法与国内法原则的总和。参见阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1981:41.
[19]各国国内的仲裁法也开始趋向于减少对仲裁程序具体规则的限制,而仅保留某些关于正当程序的基本规则,如法国、瑞士的立法。
[20]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:347.
[21]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of ICSID[M].1993:119;A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States:Applicable Law and Default Procedure[A].in A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995:179-187.
[22]A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:389.
[23]P.F.Sutherland.The World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1979,28:394.
[24]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff publishers,1993:125-130.
[25]A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of other States:Applicable Law and Default Procedure[A].in selected Essays-World Bank,ICSID and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M].Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995:181.
[26]Mosbe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff Publisbers,1993:121.
[27]Ibrahim F.I.Shihata,Antonio R.Para.Applicable Substantive Law in Disputes Between States and Private Foreign Parties:the Case of Arbitration under the ICSID Convention[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,1994,(9):189.
[28]Joy Cberian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:115.
[29]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:115.
[30]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:77.
[31]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):109-115页.
[32]朱利安·P·M·卢.国际商事仲裁中可适用的法律[M].1975:350.
[33]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:68.
[34]G·R·德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16,1982,2:68-69.
[35]W.Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2000,(Fall):371.
[36]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):109-115.
[37]Report of the Executive Directors on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States,p.13.
[38]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1986,(1):112.
[39]明A·布鲁彻斯.公约[J].海牙国际法学院讲演集,1972,136:392.
[40]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic ofSri Lanka(1990),ICSID Reports 245.
[41]John A.Westberg.Applicable Law,Expropriatory Takings and Compensation in Cases of Expropriation:ICSID and Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Case Law Compared[J].ICSID Review-FILJ 1993,(8):8.
[42]W.Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshoid[J].ICSID Review-FILJ,2000,(Fall):374,380.
[43]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A.W.Sijthoff,1975:90.
[44]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:422;
卢绳祖.国际商事仲裁所适用的法律[J].法学评论,1984,(1):9.
[45]西蒙特.友谊仲裁的理由[A].施米特夫.国际商事仲裁报告[M].130:136-147;
朱利安·P·M·卢.国际商事仲裁中可适用的法律[M].1978:508.
[46]大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国政府和阿根廷共和国政府关于促进与保护投资的协定,1990年12月11日签订,1993年2月19日生效。
[47]Agreement on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments,Mar22,1994,Brazil-Chile,art.Ⅷ(5).
[48]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Award on Jurisdiction,January25,2000.
[49]Compania de Aguas del Aconquija S.A.& Vivendi Universal S.A.(formerly Compagnie Geneale des Eaux) v.Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulment,July3,2002.
[50]A.Parra,Applicable Substantive Law in ICSID Arbitrations Initiated Under Investment Treaties[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):20.
[51]《维也纳条约法公约》第二条第一款a项及第三十一条第三款c项。
[52]《国家对国际不法行为的责任条款》(草案)案文第三条,国际法委员会2001年通过。
[53]ICSID Case No.ARB/97/3,Decision on Annulment,July3,2002[J].I.L.M.,2002,1135(41):95-96.
[54]ICSID Case No.ARB/96/1,Final Award,February 17,2000[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,167(15):64-65.
[55]Wena Hotels Ltd v.Arab Republic of Egypt,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/4,Decision on Annulment,February 5,2002[J].I.L.M.,2002,933(41):31-36.
[56]Asia Agricultural Products Ltd(AAPL) v.Republic of Sri Lanka,ICSID Case No.ARB/87/3,Final Award,June27,1990[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991,(6):20-21.
[57]K.V andevelde.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].1992:106.
[58]M.Reisman.The Regime for Lacunae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,(15).
[59]Compania del Desarrollo de Santa Elena SAv.Republic of Costa Rica,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/1,Final Award,February17,2000[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2000,(15):64.
[60]NAFTA,art.1131,1132.
[61]Andrew E.L.Tueker.Energy Charter Treaty and"Compulsory" International State/Investor Arbitration[J].Leiden Journal of International Law,1998,(3):525.
[62]Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions(NAFTA Free Trade Commission,July31,2001 ),[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-lnterpr-en.asp,2008-8-6.
[63]Todd Weilet.Newsletter Commentary on July 31st Commission Statement,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[64]Statements of the NAFTA Free Trade Commission on the Operation of Chapter11,October,7,2003[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[65]NAFTA,Article2001.
[66]Ian A.Laird.NAFTA Chapter11:Betrayal,Shock And Outrage-Recent Developments in Nafta Article 1105[J].Asper Rev.Int' l Bus.& Trade L.2003,185(3 ):213.
[67]例如1994年中国-冰岛BIT就没有提及ICSID仲裁准据法问题。
[1]J.C.Thomas.Reflections on Article 1105 of NAFTA:History,State Practice and the Influence of Commentators[J].ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2002,17(1):44.
[2]Havana Charter[EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com/instruments/Havana%20Charter%201948.pdf,2008-4-8.
[3]Christoph Schreuer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade,2005,6(3):357
[4]UNCTAD,Fair and Equitable Treatment,paras.15-16.[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/psiteiitdllv3.en.pdf,2008-11-30.
[5]成员国为阿根廷、巴西、巴拉圭及乌拉圭。
[6]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-25.
[7]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:318.
[8]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:216.
[9]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment(2)[M].Cambridge University Press,2004:216.
[10]http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200504/20050400033864,html,2008-11-22.
[11]ECT.Article 10 Promotion,Protection and Treatment of Investments(1) Each Contracting Party shall,in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty,encourage and create stable,equitable,favourable and transparent conditions for Investors of other Contracting Parties to Make Investments in its Area.Such conditions shall include a commitment to accord at all times to Investments of Investors of other Contracting Parties fair and equitable treatment.
[12]比如捷克-美国BIT第二条(a)项:阿根廷-美国BIT第二条第二款(a)项。
[13]Patrick G.Foy,Robert J.C.Deane.Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties:Recent Developments under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement,ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2001(16):302.
[14]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究--由NAFTA实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005,(6):47.
[15]刘笋.双边投资条约中的绝对待遇标准评析[J].武汉大学学报,2003,(2):56.
[16]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999:441.
[17]Stephen Vasciannie.The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].British Year Book of International Law,1999(70):99.
[18]UNCTAD.International Investment Agreements:Key issues[J].UNCTAD Publications.2004,(1):209.
[19]Robert Azinian and Others v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/2,Award,1November1999.本案涉及到一项特许权契约,申请人的公司于1993年11月获得了墨西哥Naucalpan市政府授予的搜集和处理固体废物的特许权。但是,从该项特许权产生之初就产生了很多履行方面的问题,随后又进行了当地的诉讼,新选举成立的一届市政府又打算撤销该项特许权,于是申请人的公司在墨西哥的三级法院进行了层层诉讼,但均以失败告终。最终,申请人提起NAFTA第十一章仲裁,申请认定墨西哥政府撤销特许权的行为违反NAFTA第一千一百零五条和第一千一百一十条(征收问题)的规定,申请人认为墨西哥政府不仅拒绝给予其公司公正与公平的待遇,并且其撤销特许权的行为征收了其在合同项下所享有的权利。
[20]Charles Brower.Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA:the Empire Strikes Back[J].Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,2001,43(40):56;S.Vasciannie.The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1999,99(70):163;and F.A.Mann,British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,(52):243.
[21]美国的Metalclad公司1997年1月对墨西哥联邦政府提起诉讼,指控其对该公司在墨西哥的危险废物处理设施开发采取的措施违反了NAFTA第一千一百零五条(最低待遇标准)和第一千一百一十条(征收)的规定。
[22]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.75-76.
[22]S.D.Myers案涉及加拿大政府实施的一项关于PCB废物的出口禁令(在美国临时取消从加拿大进口这种废物的禁令之后不久发布),加拿大环境部长发布这项禁令的目的是要确保该种废物在加拿大加工,促进国内加工产业的健康发展。但是,申请人在美国俄亥额州建立了一家PCB处理厂,打算通过将加拿大产生的PCB废物运送到俄亥额州处理来提供跨境服务。他认为这项禁令影响了其投资利益。于是申请人Myers公司于1998年10月对加拿大政府提起了2亿美元的求偿要求,诉称加拿大违反了第一千一百零二条规定的国民待遇义务,第一千一百零五条的公正与公平待遇义务,以及第一千一百一十条征收问题的规定。
[23]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,November13,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-28.
[24]Pope&Talbot公司系美国的一家木材公司,该公司于1999年3月对加拿大政府提出求偿要求,指控加拿大政府关于软木出口配额的分配违反了NAFTA第一千一百零二条(国民待遇)、第一千一百零五条(最低待遇标准)、第一千一百零六条(履行要求)以及第一千一百一十条(征收)的规定。
[25]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-28.
[26]Catherine Yannaca-Small,Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-28.
[27]http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-interpr-en.asp,2008-11-28.
[28]UNCTAD.Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements,Fair and Equitable Treatment,[M].1999:39-40.
[29]朱小菁.NAFTA投资仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社.2006:75.
[30]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003[J].I.L.M.2003,(42):128.
[31]Genin Award.Para.367.Article Ⅱ(3)(a) of the BIT requires the signatory governments to treat foreign investment in a "fair and equitable" way.Under international law,this requirement is generally understood to "provide a basic and general standard which is detached from the host State's domestic law." While the exact content of this standard is not clear,the Tribunal understands it to require an "international minimum standard" that is separate from domestic law,but that is,indeed,a minimum standard.Acts that would violate this minimum standard would include acts showing a willful neglect of duty,an insufficiency of action falling far below international standards,or even subjective bad faith.
[32]R.Dolzer,M.Stevens.Bilateral Investment Treaties[M].The Hague,Martinus Nijhoff,1995:59.
[33]F.A.Mann.British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,(52):241.
[34]Omar Garcia- Bolivar.The Teleology of International Investment Law-the Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment &Trade,2005,6(5):763-771.
[35]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,August30,2000,paras.74-101.
[36]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003[J].I.L.M.2004,(43):154.
[37]MTD Equity Sdn.Bhd.& MTD Chile S.A.v.Chile,Final Award,May25,2004,paras.112-113.
[38]Occidental Exploration and Production Company v.The Republic of Ecuador,Final Award,July 1,2004,para.183.
[39]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,May12,2005,para.274.
[40]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005:269.
[41]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.98.
[42]Christoph Schemer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3);Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade2005,6(2).
[43]Christoph Scheruer.Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3):381
[44]Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade2005,6(2):305.
[45]Alex Genin v.Republic of Estonia,Award,June25,2001,para.371.
[46]Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co S.A.(Greece) v.Egypt,Award,April 12,2002,para.143.
[47]Tecmed Award.Para.162.
[48]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.91,99.
[49]Mondev lntemational LTD v.United States of America,Award,October11,2002,paras.95-96.
[50]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,paras.132-134.
[51]Loewen v.United States,ICSID Award of June26,2003,paras.137,142-157.
[52]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,para.76.
[53]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Final Award,30 August,2000,paras.99.
[54]Metalelad Corporation v.Mexico,Review by British Columbia Supreme Court,2 May,2001,para.72.
[55]Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Law[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(2):305.
[56]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.98.
[57]案件起因于,西班牙一个具有公共职能的政府机构从投资者的私人账户转移了30万西班牙币到投资者所投资的公司账户,虽然投资者同意转让这笔资金,但是政府机构在投资者正式同意并协商好金融安排及贷款的细节问题之前,政府就转让了该笔资金。
[58]申请人经营一家危险废物掩埋厂Cyrtar,经营Cyrtar须得到墨西哥政府机构INE的许可证。申清人开始取得了该项许可证,随后还进行了续期,但是1998年11月,INE拒绝继续批准申请人的续期申请,并在同一天作出项决议拒绝授权Cyrtar经营掩埋厂,要求其关闭。
[59]智利政府(被申请人)与投资者签订了一份投资契约,计划修建一个大型的社区。但是,后来却发现这个修建计划违反了智利的区域划分法规的规定,建设计划无法开展。
[60]Emilio Agustin Maffezini v.Kingdom of Spain,ICSID Case No.ARB/97/7,Award,November13,2000[J].ICSID Review -Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):83.
[61]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English.Translation,29 May 2003.paras.153-154.
[62]MTD Award,Para.163.
[63]Thoms Walde.Separate Opinion of the Final Award of international Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v.Mexico,para.37[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_separate_opinion.pdf,2008-12-1.
[64]J.Paulsson.Investment Protection Provisions in Treaties[A].in International Chamber of Commerce,Investment Protection /La Protection de l' Investissement[M].2000:22.
[65]CME Czech Republic BV(The Netherlands) v.The Czech Republic,Partial Award,Septemberl3,2001,Nexis Mealey Publications Doc.No.05-011127-013A,para.611,also [EB/OL].http://www.cetv-net.com/arbitration.asp,2008-11-27.
[66]Tecnicas Medioambientales TECMED SAv.Estados Mexicanos,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003[J].I.L.M.,2004,133(43):152-174.
[67]OEPC Final Award,July 1,2004,paras.183-187;CMS Award,paras.274-281.
[68]International Thunderbird Gaming corporation v.Mexico,Arbitral Award,January26,2006,paras.147-167.
[69]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English Translation,29 May 2003,paras.153-154.
[70]Waste Management,Inc.v.United Mexican States,Final Award,April 30,2004,para.138.
[71]Mondev International LTD v.United States of America,Award,October11,2002,para.116.
[72]Tecmed Award,Unofficial English Translation,29 May 2003.paras.153.
[73]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,Final Award,May 12,2005,para.280.
[74]美国2004年BIT范本[EB/OL].http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/prsrl/2004/28923.htm,2008-11-12.
[75]如美国与澳大利亚、中美洲、智利、摩洛哥以及新加坡签署的自由贸易协定。
[76]Patrick G.Foy,Robert J.C,Deane.Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties: Recent Developments under Chapter11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,(16):317.
[77]加拿大2004年BIT范木[EB/OL],http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/what_fipa-en.asp,2008-2-23.
[78]陈辉萍,黄玉梅.国际投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准的新发展[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:11-13.
[79]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award on Damages,May 31,2002,para.13.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-11-2.
[80]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[81]中华人民共和国对外贸易经济合作部.国际投资条约汇编[Z].北京:警官教育出版社1998.
[82]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[83]商务部条法司.双边投资协定[EB/OL].http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2008-4-8.
[84]Michael G.Parisi.Moving Toward Transparency? An Examination of Regulatory Taking[J].Emory International Law Review,2005,(19):388.
[85]Forward.Introduction to Regulatory Expropriation in International Law and Case Summaries[J].New York University Environmental Law Journal,2002,(11 ).
[86]Barton Legum.Lessons Learned from the NAFTA:The New Generation of U.S.Investment Treaty Arbitration Provisions[J].ICSID-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):344-348.
[87]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-8-9.
[88]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[89]Pope & Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[90]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic ca/alphabetical_list.htm,2008-11-3.
[91]Corlos E.Alfaro,Pedro M.Lorenti.The Growing Opposition of Argentina to ICSID Arbitral Tribunals- A Conflict between International and Domestic Law?[J].The Journal of World Trade and Investment,2005,6(3).
[92]国家作其代表。
[93]Francisco Orrego Vicuna.Regulatory Expropriations in International Law:Carlos Calvo,Honorary NAFTA Citizen[J1.New York University Environmental Law Journal.2002.11:23.
[94]《奥本海国际法》(第九版)指出,“按照国际习惯法,原则上一个国家在对待本国领土内外国人方面具有的广泛的自由决定权,一般也适用于外国人在国家境内的财产。例如,一个国家可以限制外国人持有财产的权利;对私有财产的广泛的干预,包括外国人的财产在内。在关于税收、警察措施、公共卫生、公用事业的管理和城乡的规划这些问题方面,已属司空见惯。见王铁崖等.奥本海国际法(第九版),第一卷第二分册,[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998:323.
[95]Lauder v.Czech Republic,UNCITRAL,Final Award,September 3,200 1,para.200[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/LauderAward.pde2008-11-3.
[96]例如,中国-阿根廷BIT第四条第一款。ECT第十三条也规定,缔约一方投资者的投资在另一缔约方区域内不应被国有化、征收或者被采取等同于国有化或征收效果的措施。NAFTA第一千一百一十条规定,一方不得在其境内对另一方投资者的投资实行直接或间接的国有化或征收,或者对此项投资采取等同于国有化或征收的措施。
[97]例如,美国-阿根廷BIT第四条第一款。德国BIT通常也规定财产保护扩及到“其效果相当于征收或国有化的任何其它措施”。
[98]Bjφrn Kunoy.Developments in Indirect Expropriation Case Law in ICSID Transnational Arbitration[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade,2005,6(3):472.
[99]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,para,200.2008-11-3.
[100]Metalclad Corporation v.United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1,Award,August 30,2000[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/mm- award-e.pdf,2008-11-3.该 案中,原告在墨西哥投资开发和经营一家有害垃圾填埋场,投资前获得了墨西哥政府的许可。建成后,填埋场所在地的地方政府却以可能破坏环境为由拒绝许可其经营。仲裁庭认为地方政府的行为等同于征收。
[101]NAFTA第一千一百一十条规定:“任何缔约国不得对其他缔约国的投资者的投资(investment)……直接或间接实行国有化或征收,或采取相当于国有化或征收的措施(a measure tantamount to nationalization or expropriation),除非……”。该条规定的征收范围不仅包括直接征收和间接征收,还包括了东道国所采取的任何与征收具有相同影响的措施。
[102]Pope&Talbot Inc.v.Government of Canada,Interim Award,June 26,2000[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/ma-nac/documents/pubdoc7.pdf,2008-11-3.在该案中,原告通过在加拿大的子公司制造并向美国出口软木,1996年,加拿大根据美加两国的协定,对向美国出口的软木实施数量限制。原告认为加拿大政府的措施根据NAFTA第一千一百一十条等同于征收。仲裁庭最后否定了原告的此项主张。
[103]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,Partial Award,November 13,2000[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/documents/myersvcanada-partialaward final 13-11-00.pdf,2008-11-3.该案中,原告通过在加拿大的子公司向美国出口印刷电路板进行处理,但加拿大随后制定了一项出口禁令,禁止向美国出口印刷电路板废物,对原告子公司的经营造成了影响。
[104]Marin Roy Feldman Karpa(CEMSA) v.Unitied Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB (AF)/99/1,Award of 16 December 2002.[EB/OL].http://www.world-bank.org/icsid/cases/feldman_mexico-award-en.PDF,2008-11-3.该案中,一家外国贸易公司从墨西哥出口香烟,墨西哥政府拒绝为该公司办理出口退税。原告认为墨西哥政府违反了NAFTA第一千一百一十条,构成征收。仲裁庭否认了原告的主张。
[105]Stephen Fietta.Expropriation and Fair and Equitable Standard(BIICL Fifth Investment Treaty Conference),p.1,[EB/OL].http://www.biicl.org,2008-11-3.
[106]Stephen Fietta.The"Legitimate Expectation"Principle under Article 1105NAFTA-International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v.The United Mexican States[J].The Journal of World Investment and Trade,2006,7(3):425.
[107]Metalclad Corporation v.Mexico,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/97/1,Final Award,30August,2000,para.103.
[108]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,paras.224,286.
[109]International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v.The United Mexican States,Arbitral Award,January26,2006,paras.147.[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_award.pdf,2008-11-3.
[110]Rudolf Dolzer.Indirect Expropriation:New Development?[J].New York University Enviromental Law Journal,2002,11:78-79.
[111]CMS Gas Transmission Company v.The Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No.ARB/01/8,Award of May 12,2005,para.107.
[112]L.Yves Fortier,Stephen L.Drymer.Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment:I Know It When I See It,or Caveat Investor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):314.
[113]TippeRs,Abbett,McCarhy,Stratton v.TAMS-AFFA Consulting Engineers of Iran,Award No.141-7-2(1984),6 IRAN-U.S.C.T.R.,pp.225-226.
[114]Eudoro A.Olguin v.Republic of Paraguay,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/5,Award of July26,2001,para.84,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/cases/Olgun-arawd-en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[115]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAward.doc,2008-11-3.
[116]L.Yves Fortier,Stephen L.Drymer,Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment:I Know It When I See It,or Caveat lnvestor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004,19(2):315.
[117]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Partial Award,November13,2001,paras.164-195.[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/S.DMyers-1stPartialAward.pdf,2008-11-3.
[118]Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed S.A,v.The United Mexican States,ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2,Award,May29,2003,[J].I.L.M.2004,(43):118.该案中,一家西班牙公司的子公司在墨西哥经营一家有害垃圾填埋场,墨西哥联邦政府主管生态和环境的部门在垃圾填埋场经营的第3年未再继续发放许可,原告公司认为墨西哥政府违反了西班牙与墨西哥的投资协定,构成征收。仲裁庭支持了原告。
[119]Compaia del Desarrollo de Santa Elena v.Costa Rica,ICSID Case No.ARB/96/11,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/santaelena_award.pdf,2008-11-3.该案中,哥斯达黎加政府以承担保护环境的国际义务为理由,针对原告公司的财产发布了一项征收法令。仲裁庭认为,不论是为了保护国际环境还是国内环境,只要财产被征收,国家就有义务补偿。
[120]参见美国-新加坡FTA第十五条第六款:NAFTA第一千一百一十条:美国-阿根廷BIT 第四条第一款。
[121]Exchange of Letters on Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Singapore_FTA/Final_Texts/asse t upload_file58_4058.pdf,2008-11-3.
[122]U.S.A-Chile FTA,Annex10-D,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Chile_FRA/Final_Texts/asset_up Ioad_file4004.pdf,2008-11-3.
[123]U.S.A-Australia FTA,Annex 11-B,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Australia_FTA/Final_Texts/asset upload_file148_5168.pdf,2008-11-3.
[124]U.S.A-The Central America-Dominican Republic FTA,Chapter Ten,Annex10-C,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.g~v/assets/Trade-Agreements/Bi~atera~/CAFTA/CAFTA-DR-Fina~-Texts/asset-u pload file328_4718.pdf,2008-11-3.
[125]U.S.A 2004 BIT Model,Annex B-Expropriation,EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/USmodelbitnov04.pdf,2008-11-3.
[126]Canada 2004 BIT Model,Annex B.13(1)-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/Canadian2004.FIPA-model-en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[127]U.S.A-Uruguay BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/BIT/Uruguay/asset_upload_file748_9005.pdf.2008-11-3.
[128]见1979年《中外合资经营企业法》第二条第二款、1986年《外资企业法》第五条。
[129]见中国宪法2004年修正案第十三条。
[130]中国-韩国BIT第五条第二款。
[131]中国-法国BIT第四条第二款。
[132]中国-瑞典BIT第三条第一款。
[133]中国-摩洛哥BIT第四条第一款。
[134]史量才嫡孙投资问题与《华盛顿公约》[N].南方周末,2004,11(25):C17.
[135]最高人民法院关于执行《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》若干问题的解释,1999年11月24日最高人民法院审判委员会第1085次会议通过.法释(2000)8号,第一部分“受案范围”第一条“公民、法人或者其他组织对下列行为不服提起诉讼的,不属于人民法院行政诉讼的受案范围”第(六)项,“对公民、法人或者其他组织权利义务不产生实际影响的行为。”
[136]本案一审及二审审理结果来源于上海一中院内部信息网。
[137]“国民或公司与东道国之间争议的解决”规定在1986年中英BIT第七条,“一、缔约一方的国民或公司与缔约另一方之间有关征收补偿款额的争议,在提出书面通知该项争议之后六个月内未能友好解决,应提交国际仲裁。二、如将争议提交国际仲裁,有关的国民或公司和缔约另一方可同意将争议提交:(甲)争议双方指定的一个国际仲裁员;(乙)依照争议双方问的一项专门协议指定的专设仲裁庭;(丙)依照联合国国际贸易法委员会仲裁规则设市的专设仲裁庭。三、如按上述第二款将争议提交仲裁后三个月内没有就任一可选择的程序达成协议,争议双方有义务依照当时有效的联合国国际贸易法委员会仲裁规则将争议提交仲裁。争议双方可书而同意修改规则。”
[138]走出去七大经营风险[EB/OL].http://www.caiec.org/2005/policy view.asp?id=141.2008-5-5.
[139]童莉霞.关于中国石油行业发展海外投资的研究[EB/OL].http://www.caitec.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/a/c/200404/20040400203170.html,2005-5-5.
[1]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289.
[2]ICSID公约第五十条。
[3]ICSID公约第五十一条。
[4]这16起撤销程序即:Klockner等诉喀麦隆案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/2;Amco 等诉印尼案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/1;国际海运代理公司诉几内业案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/84/4:重新提起的Klockner等诉喀麦隆案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/81/2:重新提起的Amco等诉印尼案撤销程序,ICSID CaseNo.ABR/81/1:SPP(中东)诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/84/3;Gruslin诉马来西亚案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/99/3:Wena诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/98/4;Vivendi诉阿根延案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/97/3;CDC诉塞舌尔案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/02/14:R.F.C.C.诉摩洛哥案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/00/6;Joy诉埃及案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/03/11;Mitchell诉民主刚果案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/99/7:Repsol诉厄瓜多尔石油公司案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/01/10;MTD诉智利案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/01/7;Soufraki诉阿联酋案撤销程序,ICSID Case No.ABR/02/7.
[5]Philippe Gruslin v.Malaysia,ICSID Case No.ARB/99/3,Award of November27,2000[A],in James Crawford,Karen Lee,Elihu Lauterpacht.ICSID Report[M].Cambridge University Press,2002:484;ICSID.List of Concluded Cases [EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/conclude.htm,2008-3-9.
[6]ICSID.Disputes before the Centre[J].News from ICSID,1989,6(1):2.
[7]ICSID公约第五十二条第一款。
[8]分别为Amoco案(一)、Klockner案(一)。
[9]Georges R.Delaume.The Finality of Arbitrations Involving States:Recent Development[J].Arbitration International,1989,5:3.
[10]分别为Amoco案(一)、Klockner案(一)、Wena案、CDC案的撤销申请人。
[11]Aron Broches.Observations on the Finality of ICSID Awards[J].lCSlD Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991,6(2):328.
[12]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[13]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[14]Wena Hotels Limited v.Arab Republic of Egypt,Decision on Annulment,ICSID Case No.ARB/98/4,para.19.Wena案的案情梗概是:英国籍Wena公司与埃及宾馆公司(以下简称“埃宾公司”)签订了两份合同,以租赁和管理位于勒克苏和开罗的两处宾馆。不久双方就租金支付问题发生争议。在埃宾公司的参与下,大批群众袭击并抢回了Wena公司租赁和管理的这两处饭店。虽经埃及检察总长裁断,埃宾公司返还了这两处宾馆,但其随后成功地使法院为该两宾馆指定了破产管理人并将Wena公司驱逐出该两宾馆。1998年7月,Wena公司向ICSID申请仲裁。仲裁庭认为,就算埃及没有参与对Wena公司所租宾馆的袭击,埃及也没有防止抢回宾馆行为的发生,随后也没有保护Wena公司的投资,因此,埃及没有给Wena公司在埃及的投资以“公正与公平待遇”和“全面的保护与安全”,违反了埃及-英国BIT。此外,埃及的行为也相当于未依照埃及.英国BIT所规定的“充分、及时、有效”标准进行补偿的征收。有鉴于此,裁决埃及赔偿Wena公司2000余万美元损失。2001年1月,埃及申请撤销仲裁裁决,专门委员会最终驳回了埃及的撤销请求。
[15]ICSID公约第五十条.第五十三条。
[16]ICSID公约第五十二条。
[17]Guillemo Aguilar Alvarez,William W.Park..The New Face of Investment Arbitration:NAFTA Chapter11[J].Yale J.Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[18]ICSID.Possible Improvements of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration,para.4 and its Annex,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/highlights/DiscussionPaper.pdf,2008-12-3.
[19]魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:367
[20]S.D.Myers,Inc.v.Canada,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/SDMeyers-1stPartialAward.pdf,2008-11-3.
[21]Methanex Corp.v.United States of America,[EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Methanex-US-1st PartialAward-7Aug2002.pdf.p.25.2008-11-3.
[22][EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Firemans-Mexico-Jurisdiction-17Jul2003.pdf,p.45.2008-11-3.
[23][EB/OL].http://www.investmentclaims.com /decisions/Metalclad-Mexico-Award-30Aug2000-Eng.pdf,p.59.2008-11-3.
[24]Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2002,19 USCS§3802(b)(3).
[25]Article 28:Conduct of the Arbitration 10 If a separate,multilateral agreement enters into force between the Parties that establishes an appellate body for purposes of reviewing awards rendered by tribunals constituted pursuant to international trade or investment arrangements to hear investment disputes,the Parties shall strive to reach an agreement that would have such appellate body review awards rendered under Article 34 in arbitrations commenced after the multilateral agreement enters into force between the Parties.
[26]以上条约文本均来自[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Section_Index.html 2008-11-30.
[27]不同仲裁庭对于间接征收、公正与公甲待遇等问题的解释不一致,已经成为国际投资法碎片化的主要表现之一,使得投资仲裁裁决的正当性日益受到质疑。参见Susan D.Franck.The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration:Privtizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions[J].Fordham Law Review,2005,(March):73.
[28]Update on MAI Negotiations[EB/OL].http://www.flora.org/flora/archive/mai-info/update01.htm,2008-05-26.
[29]OECD.Selected Issues On Dispute Settlement,Note by the Chairman,Negotiating Group on the Multilateral Agreement in Investment(MAI)[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng9812e.pdf,p.5,2008-05-26.
[30]Possible Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/iesid/arehives.htm,2008-05-22.
[31]魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:213,220.
[32]Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries[EB/OL].http://www.southcentre.org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpaper_feb05,doc,p.57-60,2008-05-28.
[33]ICSID公约第六十六条第一款规定:每次修改应在本公约的保存者向各缔约国发出关于所有缔约国已经批准、接受或核准该项修改的通知之后30天开始生效。
[34]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决国际投资争端国际中心机制研究”[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:261-262.
[35]G·R·德劳姆.跨同契约[M].Booklet F.1983:85-88:A·布鲁彻斯.解决投资争端国际中心经验[A].见S·鲁宾,R·尼尔森.国际投资争端:避免与解决[M].1984:84-85.
[36]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].2 ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289.
[37]ICSID公约第五十四条第三款。
[38]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:237.
[39]Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention:Binding Force,Finality,Reorganization,Enforcement,Execution[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):315-316.
[40]A.Broches.The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States[A].in A.Broches.Selected Essays:World Bank,ICSID,and Other Subiects of Public and Private International Law[M].1995:232-239.
[41]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:216-217.
[42]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:374-384.
[43]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社2000:410-465.
[44]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社2000:384-399.
[45]NAFTA,art.1136(1).
[46]NAFTA,art.1136(4).
[47]NAFTA,art.1136(6).
[48]NAFTA,art.1136(5).
[49]Guiilermo Aguilar Alvarez,William W.Park,The New Face of Investment Arbitration:NAFTA Chapter11[J].Yale J.Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[50]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:351-361.
[51]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:249-266;M.Somarajah.The Settlement of Foereign Investment Disputes[M].2000:298-299.
[52]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:366-381.
[53]W·彼得.国际投资协议仲裁与重开谈判[M].1986:211.
[54]G·R.德劳姆.跨国契约[M].Booklet16.2,1982:74;沙赫特.更加非政治化[J].ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志,1987,(1):9.
[55]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:446-448.
[56]参见《ICSID评论--外国投资法杂志》,1999,(2):342页。
[57]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:303-312.
[58]中华人民共和国最高人民法院.关于执行我国加入《联合国承认和执行外国仲裁裁决公约》的通知(第二条)[N].中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报,1987,(2):16.
[1]慕亚平.国际投资的法律制度[M].广州:广东人民出版社,1999:40.
[2]曹建明,周洪钧,王虎华.国际公法学[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:193-194.
[3]魏敏等.国际法概论[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1986:284.
[4]余劲松.国际投资法[M].北京:法律出版社,2007:216.
[5][英]詹宁斯,瓦茨.奥本海国际法(第一卷第一分册)[M].王铁崖等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1995:12,32.
[6]孙南申.国际投资法[M].北京:中国人民出版社,2008:193.
[7]韩健.现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:2,374-399,410-465.
[8]陈治东.国际商事仲裁法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998:10,206,216-217.
[9]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007:285.
[10]姚梅镇.国际投资法教学参考资料选编(下册)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:62-63.
[11]叶兴平.国际投资争端重要法律文献[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:623-624.
[12]全国人大常委会法制工作委员会民法室.中华人民共和国仲裁法全书[M].北京:法律出版社,1995.
[13]陈安.国际投资争端案例精选[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:141.
[14]姚梅镇.国际投资法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1987:422.
[15]陈安.国际投资争端仲裁--“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2001:261-262,347.
[16]阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1981:41.
[17]李贵英.国际投资法专论--国际投资争端之解决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2004:19.
[18]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005:269.
[19]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999:441.
[20]龚刃韧.国家豁免问题的比较研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1994:249-266,303-312,351-381,446-448.
[21]周成新.国际投资争议的解决方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1989:237.
[1]刘琨,杜玉韬.论国际投资法的发展以及我国投资法的重构[J].前沿,2003,(7).
[2]林江.国际投资的法律保护[J].引进与咨询,1998,(2).
[3]詹晓宁.国际投资协定近期发展动向分析[N].国际商报,2005,9(23):7.
[4]余劲松,詹晓宁.国际投资协定的近期发展及对中国的影响[J].法学家,2006,(3):154.
[5]陈辉萍,黄玉梅.国际投资协定中公正与公平待遇标准的新发展[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:11-13.
[6]朱小菁.NAFTA投资仲裁中的公正与公平待遇标准[A].见国际经济法学刊[M].第13卷第3期,北京:北京大学出版社,2006:75.
[7]刘笋.双边投资条约中的绝对待遇标准评析[J].武汉大学学报,2003,(2):56.
[8]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究--由NAFTA实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005,(6):47.
[9]中华人民共和国最高人民法院.关于执行我国加入《联合国承认和执行外国仲裁裁决公约》的通知(第2条)[N].中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报,1987,(2):16.
[10]魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:213,220.
[11]魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:367.
[1]M.Sornarajah.The International Law on Foreign Investment[M].Cambridge University Press.1994:225,363-365.
[2]UNCTAD.Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement[R].New York and Geneva,2006:1.
[3]A.Redfern.M.Hunter.Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration[M].1991:39-44.
[4]S.J.Toope.Mixed International Arbitration:Studies in Arbitration Between States and Private Persons[M].Cambridge:Grotius Pub.Ltd.,1990.
[5]Kenneth J.Vandeveld.United States Investment Treaties:Policy and Practice[M].Boston:Law and Taxation Publishes,1992.
[6]M.Sornarajah.The Settlement of Foereign Investment Disputes[M]. 2000:298-299.
[7]Moshe Hirsch.The Arbitration Mechanism of International Centre for the settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Martinus Nijihoff publishers, 1993:90-92.115,119,121,125-130.
[8] J. D. Lew. Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration[M]. 1978:535.
[9]A. Broches. Bilateral Investment Protection Treaties and Arbitration of Investment Disputes[A]. in A. Broches.Selected Essays: World Bank, ICSID, and Other Subjects of Public and Private International Law[M]. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995:179-187,232-239,449-451.
[10]J.Makarczyk. Principles of a New International Economic Order[M]. 1988:261.
[11]Ian Brownhe. Principles of Public International Law[M]. 1998:496-497.
[12]A. Roth.The Minium Standard of International Law Applied to Aliens[M]. 1949:99.
[13]Georg Schwarzenberger.International Law[M]. 1957:593.
[14]J. Paulsson. Investment Protection Provisions in Treaties[A].in International Chamber of Commerce, Investment Protection /La Protection de 1' Investissement[M].2000:9,22,130,136-147.
[15] R. Dolzer,M. Stevens.Bilateral Investment Treaties[M].The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff,1995:59.
[16]K.Vandevelde.United States Investment Treaties: Policy and Practice[M]. 1992:78,106.
[17]Joy Cherian.Investment Contracts and Arbitration:the World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[M].Leyden:A. W. Sijthoff, 1975:77,90,115.
[18] Lucy Reed.Jan Paulsson, Nigel Blackaby.Guide to ICSID arbitration[M]. The Hague, New York, Kluwer Law International, 2004.
[19] Howard Mann,Konrad von Moltke. NAFTA's Chapter 11 and the Environment[M]. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999.
[20] Todd Weiler.International Investment Law and Arbitration: Leading Cases from the ICSID, NAFTA, Bilateral Treaties and Customary International Law[M]. London :Cameron May, 2005.
[21]Todd Weiler. NAFTA Investment Law and Arbitration: Past Issues, Current Practice, Future Prospects[M]. Transnational Publisher, Inc.2004.
[22]Christoph H. Schreuer.The ICSID Convention: A Commentary[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2001:279-280,284.
[1] Antonio R. Parra. Provisions on the settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1997,12(2):287-288.288.
[2]Thomas W. Waelde.International Investment Under the1994 Energy Charter Treaty:Legal,Negotiating and Policy Implication for International Investors within Western and Commonwealth of Independent States/Eastern European Countries[J] .Journal of World Trade, 1995,12:6.
[3]David R. Haigh.Chapter 11-Private Party vs. Government, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Frankenstein or Safety Value? [J] .Can.-U.S. L.J. 2000,26:115, 132.
[4]Charles N. Brower, Lee A. Steven.Who Then Should Judge?: Developing the International Rule of Law Under NAFTA Chapter 11 [J] .Chi. J. Int'l L. 2001,(2): 193,196.
[5]William W. Park.Arbitration and the FISC: NAFTA's"Tax Veto" [J]. Chi. J. Int'l L.2001,(2): 231.
[6]George M. von Meheren. Claudia T. Salomon, Aspasia A. Paroutsas, Navigating through Investor-state Arbitrations-An Overview of Bilateral Investment Treaty Claims[J]. Dispute Resolution Journal, 2004, (2):38.
[7]Dana H. Freyer, Barry H. Garfinkel, Hamid GGharavi. Bilateral Investment Treaties and Arbitration[J]. Dispute Resolution Journal, 1998, (5):413-416.
[8]Jurgen Kurtz.The MFN standard and Foreign Investment: An Uneasy Fit? [J]. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2004, 5(6):866-867.
[9]Jeffery Atik.NAFTA Chapter 11 :A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques[J].Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law, 2005,(3):220.
[10]Dodge, William S. International Decision: Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico.ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1. [J]. American Journal of International Law,2002,95:910-919.
[11]Svetozer Hanek.The Experience of socialist Lawyers in Arbitration Held in Non Socialist countries on Litigation Between Business from East and West[J].International Business Lawyers 1982 ,(10): 147.
[12] W. Michael Reisman.The Regime for Lacumae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J].ICSID Review- FILJ, 2000,(Fall):371,374,380.
[13] John A.Westberg.Applicable Law, Expropriatory Takings and Compensation in Cases of Expropriation: ICSID and Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Case Law Compared[J]. ICSID Review-FILJ 1993,8(8).
[14] Ibrahim F.I. Shihata, Antonio R. Para.Applicable Substantive Law in Disputes Between States and Private Foreign Parties: the Case of Arbitration under the ICSID convention[J]. ICSID Review-FILJ, 1994, (9):189.
[15] P. F. Sutherland.The World Bank Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1979,28:394.
[16]Z. M. Eastman.NAFTA's Chapter 11: For Whose Benefit[J]. Journal of International Arbitration, 1999, (16):105.
[17]Giorgio Sacerdoti.Investment Arbitration Under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules[J].ICSID Review- FILJ, 2004, (Spring): 11-12.
[18]Antonio R,Parra, ICSID and Bilateral Investment Treaties[J].News from ICSID,2000, 17(1):7.
[19] J Paulsson.ICSID's Achievements and Prospects[J]. ICSID Rev - FILJ.1991,6:380.
[20] O.E.Garc(?)a-Bol(?)var.The Teleology of International Investment Law: The Role of Purpose in the Interpretation of International Investment Agreements[J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6:751-771.
[21] J.Kurtz.The MFN Standard and Foreign Investment: An Uneasy Fit? [J].The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2004, 5:870-871.
[22] R.Teitelbaum.Who's Afraid of Maffezini? Recent Developments in the Interpretation of Most Favored Clauses[J].Journal of International Arbitration, 2005,22(3):225-226.
[23] R. Dolzer,T. Myers, After Tecmed: Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 2004,19:59.
[24] Dana H. Freyer, David Herlihy.Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration: Just How"Favored"is"Most-Favored"?[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2005, 20(1):61-62.
[25] Amr A. shalakany, Arbitration and the Third World: A Plea for Reassessing Bias under the Specter of Neoliberalism[J].Harvard International Law Journal, 2000, 41:419-424.
[26] Jonathan Fried.Globalization and International Law-Some Thoughts for Citizens and States[J]. Queen's Law Journal 1997, 23 :259,274.
[27] Howard Mann.NAFAT and the Environment: Lessons for the Future[J]. Tulane Environmental Law Journal 2000,13:408.
[28] Ian A. Laird.NAFTA Chapter11: Betrayal, Shock And Outrage-Recent Developments in Nafta Article 1105[J]. Asper Rev. Int' 1 Bus.& Trade L.,2003,(3):213.
[29] M.Reisman.The Regime for Lacunae in the ICSID Choice of Law Provision and the Question of Its Threshold[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 2000, 15.
[30] Andrew E.L.Tucker.Energy Charter Treaty and"Compulsory" International State/Investor Arbitration[J].Leiden Journal of International Law, 1998, 3:525.
[31] A. Parra.Applicable Substantive Law in ICSID Arbitrations Initiated Under Investment Treaties[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 2001,16:20.
[32] William W. Park. The Lex Loci Arbiti, and International Commercial Arbitration[J]. International and Comparative Law Qurterly, 1983, 32:23.
[33] J.Paulsson.Arbitration Unbound: Award Detached from the Law of Its Country of Origin[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1981,30:358.
[34] White.Expropriations of the Libyan Oil Concessions: Two Conflicting International Arbitrations[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1981,30:1,7.
[35] L. Yves Fortier, Stephen L. Drymer.Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International Investment: I Know It When I See It, or Caveat Investor[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 2004,19(2):314-315.
[36] Rudolf Dolzer. Indirect Expropriation: New Development?[J].New York University Enviromental Law Journal, 2002,11:78-79.
[37] Stephen Fietta. The "Legitimate Expectation'Trinciple under Article 1105 NAFTA-International Thundebird Gaming Corporation v. The United Mexican States[J]. The Journal of World Investment and Trade, 2006, 7(3):425.
[38] Bjφrn Kunoy.Developments in Indirect Expropriation Case Law in ICSID Transnational Arbitration[J]. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6(3):472.
[39] Corlos E. Alfaro,Pedro M. Lorenti.The Growing Opposition of Argentina to ICSID Arbitral Tribunals- A Conflict between International and Domestic Law?[J].The Journal of World Trade and Investment, 2005. 6(3).
[40] Francisco Orrego Vicuna.Regulatory Expropriations in International Law: Carlos Calvo, Honorary NAFTA Citizen[J].New York University Environmental Law Journal,2002,11:23.
[41] Michael G Parisi.Moving Toward Transparency? An Examination of Regulatory Taking[J].Emory International Law Review, 2005, 19:388.
[42] Barton Legum.Lessons Learned from the NAFTA: The New Generation of U.S.Investment Treaty Arbitration Provisions[J].ICSID-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2004, 19(2):344-348.
[43] Patrick G Foy, Robert J.C, Deane. Foreign Investment Protection under Investment Treaties: Recent Developments under Chapterl 1 of the North American Free Trade Agreement[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,2001,16:302,317.
[44] F.A.Mann, British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments[J].British Yearbook of International Law,1981,52:241.
[45] Charles Brower.Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA: the Empire Strikes Back[J]. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,2001,40:56.
[46] Stephen Vasciannie. The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law and Practice[J].the British Yearbook of International Law, 1999,70:116-117,212.
[47] Barnali Choudhury.Evolution or Devolution? Defining Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Law[J]The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2005,6(2):305.
[48] Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez, William W. Park.The New Face of Investment Arbitration: NAFTA Chapter 11[J]. Yale J. Int'l L.2003,28:374,375.
[49] Aron Broches.Awards Rendered Pursuant to the ICSID Convention: Binding Force, Finality, Reorganization, Enforcement, Execution[J]. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1987,(2):289,315-316.
[50] Susan D. Franck.The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privtizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions [J].Fordham Law Review,2005,(March):73.
[51] Georges R.Delaume.The Finality of Arbitrations Involving States: Recent Development[J].Arbitration International, 1989, 5:3.
[52] Aron Broches.Observations on the Finality of ICSID Awards[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1991, 6(2):328.
[53]David D.Caron.Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process:Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal[J].ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal,1992,7(1):37.
[54]J.C.Thomas.Reflections on Article 1105 of NAFTA:History,State Practice and the Influence of Commentators[J].ICSID Rev.-F.I.L.J,2002,17(1):44.
[55]David A.Gantz.The Evolution of FTA Investment Provisions:From NAFTA to the United States -Chile Free Trade Agreement[J].19 Am.U.Int' l L.Rev.2004,19:679,743-746.
[1]UNCTAD.Bilateral Investment Treates,1959-1999,Untied Nations2000-2006,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/iia,2008-7-9.
[2][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/vivendi_annul.pdf,2008-5-30.
[3]Methanex v.United States,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/alphabeticai_list.htm,2008-5-30
[4]National GRID PLC v.The Argentine Republic,Decision on Jurisdiction of June 20,2006,[EB/OL].http://investmentclaims.com/decisions/NationalGrid-Argentina_Jurisdiction.pdf,2008-5-30
[5]S.D.Myers Inc.v.Government of Canada,UNICTRAL,Award,November13,2000,paras.264-266.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org.2008-5-30
[6]Pope and Talbot Inc.v.The Government of Canada,Award,April 10,2001.para.118.[EB/OL].http://www.naftalaw.org,2008-5 -30
[7]Ronald S.Lauder v.the Czech Republic,Award of September3,2000,para.203,[EB/OL].http://www.mfcr.cz/static/Arbitraz/en/FinalAwar d.doc,2008-5-30.
[8][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/joy-mining-award.pdf,2008-5-30.
[9][EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf,2008-5-30.
[10][EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/disp/ethyl_archive-en.asp,2008-5-30.
[11]UNCTAD,2006World Investment Report[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir2006_fas_en.pdf,2008-9-1.
[12]德国-巴基斯坦BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/germany_pakistan.pdf, 2008-11-1.
[13]中国-德国BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/china_germany.pdf,2008-11-1.
[14][EB/OL].http://naftaclaims.com/Disputes/USA/Loewen/LoewenFinalAward.pdf,2008-10-5.
[15]John Dugard,First Report on Diplomatic Protection,U.N.GAOR International Law Commission,52d Sess.,P16,U.N.Doc.A/CN.4/506(2000),[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/law/ilc/sessions/52/52docs.htm,2008-11-28.
[16]Todd Weiler.Newsletter Commentary on July 31st Commission Statement,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[17]Statements of the NAFTA Free Trade Commission on the operation of Chapter11,October,7,2003,[EB/OL].http://www.naftaclaims.com/commission.htm,2008-9-7.
[18]Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions(NAFTA Free Trade Commission,July31,2001 ),[EB/OL].http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/NAFTA-Interpr-en.asp,2008-8-6.
[19]U.S.A-Uruguay BIT,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/BIT/Uruguay/asset_upload_file748_9005.pdf,2008-11-3.
[20]Exchange of Letters on Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Singapore_FTA/Final_Texts/a sset_upload_file58_4058.pdf,2008-11-3.
[21]U.S.A-Chile FTA,Annex10-D,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Chile_F TA/Final_Texts/asset_upload_file4004.pdf,2008-11-3.
[22]U.S.A-Australia FTA,Annex11-B,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilaterai/Australi a_FTA/Final_Texts/asset_upload_file 148_5168.pdf,2008-11-3.
[23]U.S.A-The Central America-Dominican Republic FTA,Chapter Ten,Annex10-C,[EB/OL].http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/CAFTA /CAFTA-DR_Final_Texts/asset_upload_file328_4718.pdf,2008-11-3
[24]U.S.A 2004 BIT Model,Annex B-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/USmodelbitnov04.pdf,2008-11-3.
[25]Canada 2004 BIT Model,Annex B.13(1)-Expropriation,[EB/OL].http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/Canadian2004-FIPA-model -en.pdf,2008-11-3.
[26]Stephen Fietta.Expropriation and Fair and Equitable Standard(BIICL Fifth Investment Treaty Conference),p.1,[EB/OL].http://www.biici.org,2008-11-3.
[27]Thoms Walde.Separate Opinion of the Final Award of international Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v.Mexico,para.37,[EB/OL].http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/itn_separate_opinion.pdf,2008-12-1.
[28]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oeed.org/dataoeed/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-28.
[29]UNCTAD.Fair and Equitable Treatment,paras.15-16.[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/psiteiitdllv3.en.pdf,2008-11-30.
[30]Catherine Yannaca-Small.Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in International Investment Law,paras.6-7.[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/53/33776498.pdf,2008-11-25.
[31]ICSID.Possible Improvements of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration,para.4and its Annex,[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/highlights/DiscussionPaper.pdf,2008-12-3.
[32]Update on MAI Negotiations[EB/OL].http://www,flora.org/flora/archive/mai-info/update01.htm,2008-05-26.
[33]OECD.Seleeted Issues On Dispute settlement,Note by the Chairman,Negotiating Group on the Multilateral Agreement in Investment(MAI)[EB/OL].http://www.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng9812e,pdf,p.5,2008-05-26.
[34]Possible Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration[EB/OL].http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/archives.htm,2008-05-22.
[35]Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries[EB/OL].http://www.southeentre.org/tadp_webpage/researeh_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpaper_feb05.doe,2008-05-28.
[36]UNCTAD.2008年世界投资报告[R].纽约、日内瓦:联合国,2008[EB/OL].http://www.unctad.org/ch/docs/wir2008overview_ch.pdf,2008-11-3.
[37]国家统计局.改革开放30年经济社会发展成就系列报告[EB/OL].http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/27/content_1132281.htm,2008-11-3.
[38]商务部.2008年1-12月全国吸收外商直接投资情况[EB/OL].http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/200902/20090206021530.htm,2009-3-31.
[39]商务部.2006年中国对外直接投资流量在全球的排位情况[EB/OL].http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20071206_88103.htm,2008-11-3.
[40]商务部.2007年中国对外直接投资统计公报中文[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200811/1226887378673.pdf,2009-3-1.
[41]商务部.2008年我国对外直接投资突破500亿美元[EB/OL].http://hzs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/date/200902/20090206052196.html,2009-3-5.
[1]郭杰论.国际投资争议解决中东道国当地救济的发展趋势[D].郑州:郑州大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[2]张美均.中国双边投资条约研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2004.
[3]江晓春.解决投资争议国际中心管辖权扩大倾向研究[D].上海:华东政法学院硕士学位论文,2006.
[4]朱小菁.NAFTA公正与公平待遇条款研究[D].厦门:厦门大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[5]曾红.国际投资法上的征收问题初探[D].深圳:深圳大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[6]陈荣.论国际投资争端中的仲裁[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[7]陈为.北美自由贸易区协议中投资者一国家争端解决机制研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[8]马迅.《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章争议解决机制研究[D].武汉:武汉大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[9]夏兰.关于投资者与国家间投资争端解决机制的理论与发展[D].深圳:深圳大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[10]马凌.国际投资争端解决机制的构建研究[D].天津:天津财经大学硕士学位论文,2005年.