国际投资协定中的最惠国条款研究
摘要
本文探讨的是国际投资协定中最惠国条款的法律问题。自从二十世纪90年代以来,随着国际投资跨国界流动的不断增长,国际投资协定,尤其是双边投资保护协定数量大量增加。最惠国条款作为国际投资协定中的核心条款之一,对于国际投资的自由化有着非常重要的作用。然而,尽管最惠国条款有久远的发展历史,但在最惠国条款的适用上,当前的国际投资争端中仍然存在很多尚未解决的问题。各国在此问题上并未形成一致的国际实践,各国学者对此问题也未形成较为一致的观点。
本文共分七章。第一章为概述,主要介绍最惠国条款在国际法中的起源和发展,对最惠国条款在国际条约中的制度价值作了研究和分析；然后介绍了国际法委员1978年《关于最惠国条款的公约(草案)》的制定情况及一些重要国际组织对该条款的研究,最后对国际法院在有关案例中涉及到最惠国条款的裁决作了介绍和分析。第二章主要介绍国际投资协定的签订情况以及这些投资协定中最惠国条款的发展情况。第三章从国际投资协定中最惠国条款的适用对象、适用范围展开分析,详细介绍了国际投资协定中投资者和投资的定义及其发展趋势；然后又从国际投资仲裁的实践分析近年来争议较多的最惠国条款的适用范围问题。第四章主要对最惠国条款的适用机制展开研究,分析了最惠国条款适用时的参照对象和参照规则,并对最惠国条款在适用时与国家对仲裁的同意之间的法律关系进行了分析。第五章研究了最惠国条款的例外制度,对其例外制度的不同表述、法律性质、适用效果等进行了分析。第六章则对GATS和FTA/RTA中的最惠国条款进行了考察和分析。第七章从上述分析和研究出发,结合中国近年来签订国际投资协定的实践,对中国实践中的有关问题,特别是中美正在谈判中的双边投资协定中的有关法律问题进行了研究,并提出相应的建议。
本文认为,最惠国条款从在国际条约中出现到现在,其发展历程说明,在国际社会中还没有形成一致的国际实践,因此,在国际法中尚不存在国际习惯法规则。各国在签订这些条约时最惠国条款表述的千差万别也表明最惠国义务还只是缔约方之间的条约义务。
在国际投资协定中,由于协定所包括的事项有其特殊性,且投资协定的权利主体包括缔约方的投资者及其投资,所以最惠国条款在国际投资协定中的适用有其特殊性,这也是本文研究的意义。首先是各个投资协定的权利义务主体不尽相同,各个投资协定对“投资者”及其“投资”的定义都有或多或少的差别,这也说明最惠国条款的适用对象在不同的投资协定中是有区别的。再者,由于各个投资协定中最惠国条款的表述不同,也使得其适用范围存在一定差异。再加上投资保护协定大都包含一个特殊的争端解决机制——投资者—东道国国际仲裁机制,就使得最惠国条款的适用更为复杂。在国际投资仲裁实践中,不同的仲裁庭使用不同的方法对这个问题做出了不同的分析和裁决,各国学者对此也是见仁见智,尚未有统一的认识。由于这些问题的存在,各国对最惠国条款的签订开始变得谨慎,最惠国条款的例外规定呈现增多且细化的趋势。本文还考察了GATS中最惠国条款的适用情况,并对相关案例进行了分析。对于FTA,本文认为,虽然FTA的合法性依据来自于WTO协定,但是FAT协议由于其协议内容的复杂性,其范围远远超过了WTO协定。在不同的章节中有的规定了最惠国条款,有的章节则没有规定最惠国条款。因此,FTA不同章节中的权利义务关系可能存在很多差别。
通过对当前国际条约实践和国际投资仲裁实践的研究和分析,结合中国近年来的条约实践和国际投资发展情况,中国需要全面考虑和评估国际投资协定及其最惠国条款对中国经济发展的影响。
This dissertation focuses on the research on the Most-favored-nation clause (MFN clause) contained in international investment treaties. Accompanied with the constant increase of international investment flow between countries since the 1990's, the number of international investment treaties, especially the bilateral investment treaties has also increased substantially. The MFN clause, one of the core clauses in international investment treaties, plays an important role in the process of the liberalization of international investment. Despite of the long history of MFN clause, there still exists many unsolved questions in the application of MNF clause in the settlement of international investment disputes. States have not constituted constant international practice as to such question, and the scholars form different countries also have not reached any common ground.
The dissertation consists of seven chapters. In the first chapter author gives a general introduction to the origin and development of MFN clauses in international law, and gives some analysis on the law value of the MFN clause. Then the author introduces the drafting process of the Draft Articles on Most-Favored-Nation Clauses by International Law Commission (ILC) in 1978 and some studies on MFN clauses by other international organizations. At the last part of the chapter, the author studies some of the ICJ cases involving the MFN clauses. In the second chapter the author gives a rough description of development of international treaties and the MFN clauses therein. In the third chapter and forth chapter the author analyses the subjects, application scope and operation system of MFN clauses in international investment treaties. In the fifth chapter the author does some research on the exception rules of MFN clauses, while in the sixth chapter the author studies the MFN clauses in GATS and FTA/RTA. In the last chapter the author researches China's recent practice on international investment treaties and the MFN clauses therein, and gives suggestions for China's ongoing international practice.
The dissertation holds that the development of MFN clauses in international investment treaties shows that there is no constant practice in international society, so there is no customary international law for MFN clauses. The different wording of MFN clauses in international treaties also indicates that the MFN treatment obligation is just a kind of treaty obligation between contracting parties.
Because of the particularity of the subjects and objects in such treaties, the application of MFN clauses in international investment treaties is different from its application in other treaties or conventions, which is the focus and significance of this dissertation. Firstly, there are many differences between the definitions of "investors" and "investment" in different treaties, which indicates the application objects of MFN clauses in different treaties, is not always the same. Secondly, because of the different wording of MFN clauses in different treaties, the application scope of MFN clauses varies accordingly. And the investor-state disputes settlement system, which is included in almost all BITs, makes the application of MFN clauses in international investment treaties more complicated. In recent international investment arbitrations, different tribunals tried different ways to analyze such questions and gave their individual awards. The scholars around the world also do not have reached common conclusion for this question. For the problems mentioned above, states becomes prudent to the MFN clauses, and the appearance of MFN exception becomes common in the international investment treaties, which shows the concerns to such subjects from contracting parties. The dissertation also looks into the application of MFN clause in GATS and FTA/RTA. As to FTA, the dissertation holds that, though the legal base of FTA/RTA derives from WTO Agreement, the scope of FTA/RTA goes far beyond WTO Agreement. Some of the chapters in FAT/RTA have MFN clauses while other chapters do not. Therefore, the rights and obligations in different parts of FTA/RTA maybe differs a lot.
After the research of international treaties practice and international investment case study, and also after some analysis of China's recent BIT practice and China's development of importing and exporting investment, the author suggests that China should re-evaluate the influence of international investment treaties and the MFN clauses herein to China's economic development.
本文共分七章。第一章为概述,主要介绍最惠国条款在国际法中的起源和发展,对最惠国条款在国际条约中的制度价值作了研究和分析；然后介绍了国际法委员1978年《关于最惠国条款的公约(草案)》的制定情况及一些重要国际组织对该条款的研究,最后对国际法院在有关案例中涉及到最惠国条款的裁决作了介绍和分析。第二章主要介绍国际投资协定的签订情况以及这些投资协定中最惠国条款的发展情况。第三章从国际投资协定中最惠国条款的适用对象、适用范围展开分析,详细介绍了国际投资协定中投资者和投资的定义及其发展趋势；然后又从国际投资仲裁的实践分析近年来争议较多的最惠国条款的适用范围问题。第四章主要对最惠国条款的适用机制展开研究,分析了最惠国条款适用时的参照对象和参照规则,并对最惠国条款在适用时与国家对仲裁的同意之间的法律关系进行了分析。第五章研究了最惠国条款的例外制度,对其例外制度的不同表述、法律性质、适用效果等进行了分析。第六章则对GATS和FTA/RTA中的最惠国条款进行了考察和分析。第七章从上述分析和研究出发,结合中国近年来签订国际投资协定的实践,对中国实践中的有关问题,特别是中美正在谈判中的双边投资协定中的有关法律问题进行了研究,并提出相应的建议。
本文认为,最惠国条款从在国际条约中出现到现在,其发展历程说明,在国际社会中还没有形成一致的国际实践,因此,在国际法中尚不存在国际习惯法规则。各国在签订这些条约时最惠国条款表述的千差万别也表明最惠国义务还只是缔约方之间的条约义务。
在国际投资协定中,由于协定所包括的事项有其特殊性,且投资协定的权利主体包括缔约方的投资者及其投资,所以最惠国条款在国际投资协定中的适用有其特殊性,这也是本文研究的意义。首先是各个投资协定的权利义务主体不尽相同,各个投资协定对“投资者”及其“投资”的定义都有或多或少的差别,这也说明最惠国条款的适用对象在不同的投资协定中是有区别的。再者,由于各个投资协定中最惠国条款的表述不同,也使得其适用范围存在一定差异。再加上投资保护协定大都包含一个特殊的争端解决机制——投资者—东道国国际仲裁机制,就使得最惠国条款的适用更为复杂。在国际投资仲裁实践中,不同的仲裁庭使用不同的方法对这个问题做出了不同的分析和裁决,各国学者对此也是见仁见智,尚未有统一的认识。由于这些问题的存在,各国对最惠国条款的签订开始变得谨慎,最惠国条款的例外规定呈现增多且细化的趋势。本文还考察了GATS中最惠国条款的适用情况,并对相关案例进行了分析。对于FTA,本文认为,虽然FTA的合法性依据来自于WTO协定,但是FAT协议由于其协议内容的复杂性,其范围远远超过了WTO协定。在不同的章节中有的规定了最惠国条款,有的章节则没有规定最惠国条款。因此,FTA不同章节中的权利义务关系可能存在很多差别。
通过对当前国际条约实践和国际投资仲裁实践的研究和分析,结合中国近年来的条约实践和国际投资发展情况,中国需要全面考虑和评估国际投资协定及其最惠国条款对中国经济发展的影响。
This dissertation focuses on the research on the Most-favored-nation clause (MFN clause) contained in international investment treaties. Accompanied with the constant increase of international investment flow between countries since the 1990's, the number of international investment treaties, especially the bilateral investment treaties has also increased substantially. The MFN clause, one of the core clauses in international investment treaties, plays an important role in the process of the liberalization of international investment. Despite of the long history of MFN clause, there still exists many unsolved questions in the application of MNF clause in the settlement of international investment disputes. States have not constituted constant international practice as to such question, and the scholars form different countries also have not reached any common ground.
The dissertation consists of seven chapters. In the first chapter author gives a general introduction to the origin and development of MFN clauses in international law, and gives some analysis on the law value of the MFN clause. Then the author introduces the drafting process of the Draft Articles on Most-Favored-Nation Clauses by International Law Commission (ILC) in 1978 and some studies on MFN clauses by other international organizations. At the last part of the chapter, the author studies some of the ICJ cases involving the MFN clauses. In the second chapter the author gives a rough description of development of international treaties and the MFN clauses therein. In the third chapter and forth chapter the author analyses the subjects, application scope and operation system of MFN clauses in international investment treaties. In the fifth chapter the author does some research on the exception rules of MFN clauses, while in the sixth chapter the author studies the MFN clauses in GATS and FTA/RTA. In the last chapter the author researches China's recent practice on international investment treaties and the MFN clauses therein, and gives suggestions for China's ongoing international practice.
The dissertation holds that the development of MFN clauses in international investment treaties shows that there is no constant practice in international society, so there is no customary international law for MFN clauses. The different wording of MFN clauses in international treaties also indicates that the MFN treatment obligation is just a kind of treaty obligation between contracting parties.
Because of the particularity of the subjects and objects in such treaties, the application of MFN clauses in international investment treaties is different from its application in other treaties or conventions, which is the focus and significance of this dissertation. Firstly, there are many differences between the definitions of "investors" and "investment" in different treaties, which indicates the application objects of MFN clauses in different treaties, is not always the same. Secondly, because of the different wording of MFN clauses in different treaties, the application scope of MFN clauses varies accordingly. And the investor-state disputes settlement system, which is included in almost all BITs, makes the application of MFN clauses in international investment treaties more complicated. In recent international investment arbitrations, different tribunals tried different ways to analyze such questions and gave their individual awards. The scholars around the world also do not have reached common conclusion for this question. For the problems mentioned above, states becomes prudent to the MFN clauses, and the appearance of MFN exception becomes common in the international investment treaties, which shows the concerns to such subjects from contracting parties. The dissertation also looks into the application of MFN clause in GATS and FTA/RTA. As to FTA, the dissertation holds that, though the legal base of FTA/RTA derives from WTO Agreement, the scope of FTA/RTA goes far beyond WTO Agreement. Some of the chapters in FAT/RTA have MFN clauses while other chapters do not. Therefore, the rights and obligations in different parts of FTA/RTA maybe differs a lot.
After the research of international treaties practice and international investment case study, and also after some analysis of China's recent BIT practice and China's development of importing and exporting investment, the author suggests that China should re-evaluate the influence of international investment treaties and the MFN clauses herein to China's economic development.
引文
[1]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213. Report on the most-favored-nation clause, by Mr. Nikolai A. Ushakov, special Rapporteur. UN document A/CN.4/309 and Add.1 and 2.
[2]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ),UN,1999.
[3]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, Nn 2004\2
[4]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p2.
[5]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10) A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第3页。
[6]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10) A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第7-8页。
[7]联合国文件《大会正式记录,第六十三届会议,补编第10号》(A/64/10),第211-216段)。
[8]联合国文件《大会正式记录,第六十三届会议,补编第10号》(A/64/10),第211-216段)。
[9]吴昆吾《最惠国条款问题》,外交部条约委员会印行,1929年3月。该文献藏于上海图书馆近代文献库。
[10]该文章载于《王铁崖文集》,邓正来编[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
1 Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No. 3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[1]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, para 10根据经济合作组织2004年的报告,最惠国条款起源于十二世纪,seeMost-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No2004\2。但笔者认为这个细节并不影响对该问题的讨论。
[2]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, para 10.
[3]Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause in Commercial Treaties:Its Function in Theory and Practice and Its Relation to Tariff Policies, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, No.343, Economic and Political Science Series, Vol.6,No.2(1910)转引自陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:183。
[4]Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause in Commercial Treaties:Its Function in Theory and Practice and Its Relation to Tariff Policies, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, No.343, Economic and Political Science Series, Vol.6,No.2(1910).转引自陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海:复口.大学出版社,2007:183。
[5]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160.
[6]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160该条约由于英国国会的忧虑而没有通过,理由是与其以前签订的条约义务相违背。直到1786年,英国和法国才签订了一个包含最惠国条款的条约。
[7]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160.
[8]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), p5.
[9]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L,125,130 (2007), p5.
[10]薛峰.论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:16.
[11]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p162.
[12]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:53.
[13]王铁崖.最惠国条款的解释[A].见郑正来.王铁崖文选[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993:504.
[14]薛峰.论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:16.
[15]Stanley K. Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause (pt.2),3 Am. J. Int'l L.619,620-21 (1909).
[16]Letter from Secretary of State John Sherman to William I. Buchanan (Jan.11,1898), in 5 Moore's Digest of International Law 278 (1906), quoted in Hornbeck, supra note 1, at 408.
[17]Boris Nolde, La Clause de la Nation La Plus Favorisee et les Tarifs Preferentiels,39 Recueil des Cours de l'Academie de Droit International 1,91 (1932). Cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, 32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), p6.
[18]Change in Favored-Nation Clauses,5 Hackworth Digest of International Law §502, at 273 (1942), quoted in Endre Ustor, Fourth Report on the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause, [1973] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 97,98, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SER.A/1973.
[19]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 163.
[20]Marian Nash Leich, Diplomatic Privileges And Immunities (U.S. Digest, Ch.4, S2) Most-Favored-Nation Status, American Journal of International Law April,1983.
[21]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 162.
[22]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 162.
[23]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54.
[24]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N., at 169.
[25]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54.
[26]The Economic Intelligence Unit,'“2010年世界投资前景：繁荣还是衰退?”(World Investment Prospect to 2010 Boom or Backlash?) (Laza Kekic),第22灭。转引自王贵国.国际投资法[M].北京：法律出版社,2008：3.
[27]蔺志军.双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D].北京：中国政法大学.2006:4-5.
[28]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54-55.
[29]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 5.
[30]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.
[31]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[32]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[33]Article 10 of European Energy Charter Treaty, from The Energy Charter Treaty and Related Documents by Energy Charter Secretariat, available at: http://www.encharter.org/fileadmin/user upload/document/EN.pdf#page=211.
[34]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343, as of 2010/9/2.
[35]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No 2004\2., p3.
[36](美)约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001：178-179.
[37](英)詹宁斯,瓦茨修订,王铁崖等译.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,1995:15.
[38]邵津.国际法[M].北京：北京大学出版社,高等教育出版社,2005: 13.
[39]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No 2004\2., p2.
[40]如《中国-新西兰自由贸易区协定》第十一章第一百三十九条规定：一、各方在准入、扩大、管理、经营、运营、维护、使用、收益或处置方面,应当给予另一方投资者、投资者的投资及与该投资相关的活动,不低于其在同等条件下给予任何第三国投资者的投资及相关活动的待遇。二、为进一步明确,本条规定的义务不包含要求给予另一方投资者除本章规定内容以外的争端解决程序。
[41]See Schwartz. Warren F. and Sykes. Alan 0. " The Economics of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause" in Jagdeep S. Bhandari and Alan O. Sykes(1997), Economic Dimensions in International Law:Comparative and Empirical Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, at 62. Cited form Andrew T. Guzman and Alan O. Sykes(2007), Research Handbook in International Economic Law, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA. USA., at 12.
[42]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M]：长春:吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[43]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].长春：中国政法大学,2000:33.
[44]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), p13.
[45]Andrew T. Guzman and Alan O. Sykes(2007), Research Handbook in International Economic Law, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA. USA., at 13.
[46]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.III),UN,1999. at 9.
[47]引自吴昆吾《最惠国条款问题》,外交部条约委员会印行,1929年3月。该文献藏于上海图书馆近代文献库.
1481 Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.III),UN,1999. at 10.
[49]See Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco(Fr. V. U.S.).1952 I.C.J.176,192(Aug.27
[50]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/1_3.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[51]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/13.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[52]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/13.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[53]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 8.
[54]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 14.
[55]See the following acts of the General Assembly:Res.33/139 (1978),35/161 (1980), and 40/65 (1985), and Decision 43/429 (1988).
[56]See, the comments of Colombia, Netherlands, Sweden in "Comments of Member States, organs of theUnited Nations, specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations on the draft articles on the most-favored-nation clause adopted by the International Law Commission at its twenty-eighth session", in Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1978, Vol. II, Part Two, and Germany in "Analytical compilation of comments and observations from Governments, organs of the United Nations which have competence in the subject-matter and interested intergovernmental organizations:report of the Secretary-General", UN A/35/443, p. 9.
[57]Report on the most-favored-nation clause, by Mr. Nikolai A. Ushakov, special Rapporteur, UN document A/CN.4/309 and Add.1 and 2.
[58]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 16.
[59]陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007：185.
[60]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 18.
[61]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 21.
[62]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 24.
[63]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 25.
[64]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[65]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International
Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[66]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 65.
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 9.[67]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session,Yearbook of the International
[68]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1(Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 68.[69]Reoort of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session,Yearbook of the International
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1(Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 69.[70]Report on the most-favored-nation clause,by Mr.Nikolai A.Ushakov,special Rapporteur,UN documents
A/CN.4/309 and Add.1 and 2, at 4. From Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1978, vol. Ⅱ, Part One.
[71]Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Annexes, agenda item 112, document A/32/433,
para.188.
[72]Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Annexes, agenda item 112, document A/32/433,
para.21.[73]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment,UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD
/ITE//ⅡT/10(voL.Ⅲ).UN,1999.
[74]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第3页。
[75]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款T作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第7-8页。
[76]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第9页。
[77]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,笫9页。
[78]联合国国际法委员会笫五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第9页。
[79]Marie-Erance Houde,Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in Intemational Investment Law,OECD Working Paper
No.2004/2.2004.
[80]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p2.
[81]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper
No.2004/2,2004,p16.
[82]联合国国际法委员会第六十三届会议发布的研究报告(大会正式记录补编第10号A/63/10)附件B,第
322页。
[83]联合国国际法委员会第六十三届会议发布的研究报告(大会正式记录补编第10号A/63/10)附件B,第
322页。
[84]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July
22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf.
[85]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf.p.105.
[86]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf, p.107.
[87]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection 1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22),
[90]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co.(U.K.v.Iran),Judgment on Jurisdiction,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22),at 145-147.[91]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co.(U.K.v.Iran),Judgment on Jurisdiction,1952 I.C.J.93(July 22),at 157-158.[92]Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause,by Mr.Endre Ustor,Special Rapporteur,Extract frc Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970,vil.Ⅱ,document::A/CN.4/228 and Add.1,at 204.
[93]Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur, Extract from the
Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document::A/CN.4/228 and Add.1, at 204.
[94]G. Schwarzenberger, International Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals,3rd ed. (London,
Stevens & Sons,1957), p.240, cited form Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor,
Special Rapporteur, Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document::
A/CN.4/228 and Add.1
[95]See Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, Second Session, Summary
records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole (United Nations publication,
Sales No.：E.70.V.6),p.63,para.36.
[96]Case concerning rights of natiods of t h United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952:
I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 6.
[97]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 7.
[98]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 14-16.
[99]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 26.
[100]Case concerning rights of natiods of t h United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 27.
[101]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. U.K.),1953 I.C.J.10 (May 19).
[102]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction), Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 9.
[103]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction). Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 9-10.
[104]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction). Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 46.
[105]See United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards,vol. XII, United Nations publication, Sales No.: 1963.V.3),p.91.
[106]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, at 19.
[107]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C.J. Reports 1953, at 20.
[108]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, at 20.
[109]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.364.
[110]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.402.
[111]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.457.
[112]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, p.10, at 34.
[113]G Schwarzenberger, International Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals,3rd ed. (London, Stevens & Sons,1957), p.240. Cited from Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur, Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document:: A/CN.4/228 and Add.1., at 211.
[114]United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XII(United Nations publication, Sales No.1963.V.3),p.107.
[1]卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:1.
[2]汪垚.20世纪90年代以来双边投资协定评介及发展趋势研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学,2006:2.
[13]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005), UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 1.
[4]UNCTAD, Bilateral Investment Treaties 1959-1999, UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2, at 1.
[5]UNCTAD, Bilateral Investment Treaties 1959-1999, UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2, at 2.
[6]Developments in international investment agreements in 2005, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2006) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIA/2006/7, at 2.
[7]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2006-June 2007)IIA MONITOR No.3 (2007) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIA/2007/6, at 2-3.
[8]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 2.
[9]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 2-3.
[10]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[11]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 5-6.
[12]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 7.
[13]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 8.
[14]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 9.
[15]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 7.
[16]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[17]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 8.
[18]World Investment Report 1996, Investment, Trade and International Policy Arrangements, UNCTAD Publications, UN,1996, available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir1996 en.pdf, at 135-139.
[19]范剑虹.国际投资法导读[M].北京：浙江大学出版社,2000: 217.
[20]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制一若十重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:57.
[21]Available at:http://www.oecd.org/document/24/0,3343,en 26493488718757361111,00.html,, as of 2010/1/19。
[22]Available at:http://www.comunidadandina.org/ingles/normativa/d291e.htm, as of 2010/1/19。
[23]Available at:http://www.aseansec.org/6466.htm, as of 2010/1/19。
[24]Available at:http://www.apec.org/apec/business resources.html, as of 2010/1/19。
[25]Available at:htto://www.cvm.gov.br/inel/inter/mercosul/coloni-e.asp.as of 2010/1/19。
[26]Available at:http://www.ftaa-alca.org/NGROUPS/ngin/publications/english99/MERCOSUR.asp, as of 2010/1/19.
[27]曾令良.区域贸易协定的最新趋势及其对多哈发展议程的负面影响[J].法学研究,2004(5):711.
[28]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 8.
[29]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8,at 8.
[30]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 9.
[31]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999: 532.
[32]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999: 533-539.
[33]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制—若干重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:21-23.
[34]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[35]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[36]Dr. Efraim Chalamish, The Future of Bilateral Investment Treaties:A de facto Multilateral Agreement? 34 Brook. J. Int'l L.303, at 325.
[37]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 254.
[38]在当前,还只有美国、德国、荷兰和西班牙签订的DTTs中对最忠国待遇有规定,但尚未形成普遍的实践。对国际税收协定中最惠国条款的适用的研究,参见任捷.国际税收协定中最惠国条款的适用[J].法治论从,2006(2)：209-215.
[39]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[40]对对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[41]资料来源：商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html, as of 2009/9/25.
[42]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No2004\2., p5.
[43]范剑虹.国际投资发导读[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2000:434435.
[44]两者的区别主要是：参照或对比机制不同;参照对象不同;适用范围不同;例外情形不同等;联系表现在:都是为了实现对外国投资者待遇的非歧视等。参见生光军《国际投资待遇论》,中国政法大学博士论文.
[45]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 32.
[46]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 32.
[47]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ)., UN,1999, at 32.
[48]World Investment Report 1996 Investment, Trade and International Policy Arrangements, United Nations, 1996, at 182. available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir1996_en.pdf.
[49]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999:440.
[50]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 260.
[51]姚梅镇.外商投资企业法教程[M].北京：法律出版社,1990:15.
[52]高永富.国际经济法[M].上海：立信会计图书用品社,1989:234.
[53]范剑虹.国际投资发导读[M].上海：浙汀大学出版社,2000:211.
[54]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999:442.
[55]在CME Czech Republic B. V.(The Netherlands) v. Czech Republic案中,仲裁庭战定,若东道国的措施使投资无利可图则违反公平公正待遇原则,除非政府的行为明显是为了公共利益。然而,在Lauder v. Czech Republic案中,仲裁庭裁定,公平公正待遇系国际最低待遇标准,东道国政府为了实施国内法而引起之争议并不违反公平公正待遇原则。见王贵国.国际投资法[M].北京：法律出版社,2008:160 174.
[1]《关税与贸易总协定》(GATT1947)第1条将最惠国条款的待遇限定为：“在对进口或出口、有关进口或出口或对进口或出口产品的国际支付转移所征收的关税和费用方面,在征收此类关税和费用的方法方面,在有关进口和出口的全部规章手续方面,以及在第3条第2款和第4款所指的所有事项方面,任何缔约方给予来自或运往任何其他国家任何产品的利益、优惠、特权或豁免应立即无条件地给予来自或运往所有其他缔约方领土的同类产品。”
[2]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Also see http:/www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.odf.as of 2009/7/21.
131 "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol. Ⅲ), at 6.
[4]詹晓宁,葛顺奇：国际投资协定：投资和投资者的范围与定义[J].国际经济合作,2003(1)：41.
[5]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:41.
[6]詹晓宁,葛顺奇：国际投资协定：投资和投资者的范围与定义[J].国际经济合作,2003(1)：43.
[7]杨卫东.双边投资协定—中国的视角[D].北京：中国社会科学院,2002:38.
[8]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 11.
[9]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 33.
[10]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2009/7/22访问。
[11]协议文本参见商务部网站,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xieyi.shtml,2009/7/22访问.
[12]公约文本参见：http://www.miga.org/quickref/index sv.cfm?stid=1583.
[13]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[14]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 34.
[15]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol.Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 115-117.
[16]ASEAN Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, article 1(3), from UNCTAD,1996, volume Ⅱ,p.294.
[17]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf.as of 2009/7/21.
[18]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 31.
[19]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:304-305.
[20]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 31.
[21]Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/14/13/1935919.pdf, as of 2009/7/23.
[22]陈安,蔡从燕《国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践》[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007,第31页。
[23]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2009/7/22访问。
[24]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 375.
[25]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol.Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 122.
[26]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 123.
[27]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 366.
[28]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 125.
[29]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 125.
[30]Article 25 of Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, ICSID CONVENTION, Regulations and Rules, ICSID publications, April 2006, available at: http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/StaticFiles/basicdoc/CRR_English-final.pdf.
[31]G R Delaume. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (J). (1996) 1 Intl Layer,转引自胡勇,秦丽.“投资”定义与ICSID管辖权[J].宜宾,宜宾学院学报,2006(11)：8.
[32]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 164.
[33]Available at:http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-101-1997.pdf. as of 2009/7/30.
[34]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 164.
[35]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3; IIC 102 (1998), (2002) 5 ICSID Rep 200; (1998) 37 ILM 1391; Vol ⅩⅩⅣa Yearbook Commercial Arbitration (AJ van den Berg ed.Kluwer Law Intl, The Hague 1999) 39 (excerpts),9 March 1998, available at: http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-102-1998.pdf
[36]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 21. Available at: http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-101-1997.pdf.
[37]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 31-32.
[38]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 39-40.
[39]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 43.
[40]Available at: http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=showDoc&docId=DC647_En& caseId=C229.
[41]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:48.
[42]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 41.
[43]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 53.
[44]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 45.
[44]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 51.
[46]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 54-55.
[47]《关于最惠国条款的公约(草案)》第四条,参见联合国网站：http://untreaty.un. org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft%20articles/1_3_1978.pdf.
[48]卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf, as of 2009/7/21.
[49]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.下划线为本文作者所加。
[50]"Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol.Ⅲ), at 4.
[51]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 138.
[52]For a review of efforts to establish an MAI, see Riyaz Dattu, Essay, A Journey from Havana to Paris:The Fifty-Year Quest for the Elusive Multilateral Agreement on Investment,24 Fordham Int'l L.J.275 (2000). Cited from supra note.
[53]see Richard Snyder, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause:An Analysis with Particular Reference to Recent Treaty Practice and Tariffs 211-22 (1948), at 197,199-205. Cited form supra note.
[54]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004). available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[55]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 138.
[56]Maffezini v. Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision on Jurisdiction,5 ICSID (W. Bank) 396 (2000),
available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/emilio DecisiononJurisdiction.pdf.
[57]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2007:190-191.
[58]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2007:191.
[59]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final award on merits and damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580.
[60]Case summary of Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org。
[61]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 54.
[62]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 54.
1631 Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 56.
[64]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:190.
[65]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J.INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 156.
1661 Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000)
[67]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 9-10.
[68]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：41.
[69]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 14.
[70]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 15.
[71]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 23.
[72]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000). at 21.
[73]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21.
[74]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 20-21.
[75]Ibid, at 21.
[76]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21. [77]Ibid, at 25.
[78]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008, at 185; Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 157.
[79]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 158.
[80]Gabriel Egli, Don't Get Bit:Addressing ICSID's Inconsistent Application Of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses To Dispute Resolution Provisions, Pepperidge Law Review2007, at 1067.
[81]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：42.
[82]《维也纳条约法公约》第31条,见1http://www.un.org/chinese/law/ilc/treaty.htm.
[83]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008, at 185.
[84]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/siemens-decision-en.pdf.
[85]Case summary of Siemens A.G. v The Argentine Republic by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org.
[86]Case summary of Siemens A.G. v The Argentine Republic by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org.
[87]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:194.
[88]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 82..
[89]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 81.
[90]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 85-86.
[91]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004). para 95-96.
[92]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 97-99.
[93]Siemens A G. v Argentina ICSID Case No. ARR/02/8 Decision on Jurisdictinn (2004),para 101
[94]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 102.
1951 Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/salini-decision.pdf
[96]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 23-25.
[97]Case summary of Salini Costruttori S.p.A. and Italstrade S.p.A.-v-The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13) by John P. Gaffney, available at http://www.oflynnexhams.ie/news_publications/Salini%20Case%20Summary.pdf.
1981 Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 27.
[99]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008.
[100]Dana H. Freyer and David Herlihy Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and DisputeSettlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How "Favored" is "Most-Favored"?, ICSID REVIEW—FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL, at 72.
[101]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 66.
[102]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 66.
[103]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 102.
[104]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004),para 118-119.
[105]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004),para 106.
[106]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004), para 108.
[107]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004), para 109-116.
[108]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 114-115.
[109]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004),117-118.
[110]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[111]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 19-20.
[112]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 21.
[113]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 26.
[114]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005),para 26.
[115]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 79.
[116]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 189.
[117]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 192.
[118]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 193.
[119]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 196.
[120]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction.44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 195.
[121]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para214.
[122]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 213.
[123]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 215.
[124]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 218.
[125]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 221.
[126]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 240.
[127]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,
2008,
[128]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 1.
[129]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para2-3.
[130]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 4.
[131]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 8-9.
[132]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[133]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[134]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[135]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160..
[136]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 162.
[137]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 163.
[138]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 165.
[139]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 197.
[140]See Camuzzi v. Argentina. ICSID Case No. ARB/03/2.
[141]See Gas Natural SDG S. A. v. Areentian. ICSID Case No. ARB/03/10.
[142]See Tecnicas Medioambientales Teemed, S. A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case N
[143]See Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S. A.& InterAguas Servicios Integrales del Agua S. A. v. Argentina, ICSID CaseNo. ARB/03/17.
[144]See National Grid plc v. The Argentine Republic,Decision On J urisdiction dated 20 J une 2006,ad hoc arbit ration under UNCITRAL Rules.
[145]See Vivendi Universal v. Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3.
[146]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：42.
[147]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:203-204.
[1]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:34.
[2]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275Also see http://www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf. as of 2009/7/21.
[3]Article 10 of European Energy Charter Treaty, from The Energy Charter Treaty and Related Documents by Energy Charter Secretariat, available at: http://www.encharter.org/fileadmin/user_upload/document/EN.pdf#page=211
[4]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343, as of 2009/10/17.
[5]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[6]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[7]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[8]资料来源,国家商务部网站,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xieyi.shtml,2009/10/17访问.
[9]蔺志军.双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D]:北京,中国政法大学,2006:29.
[10]Treaty Concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, Thail.-F.R.G., art.3(2), June 24,2002,avialble at http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/germany_thailand.pdf.
[11]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[12]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 189.
[13]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/siemens-decision-en.pdf.
[14]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 106.
[15]Rudolf Dolzer & Margrete Stevens, Bilateral Investment Treaties 65 (1995). Cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 146.
[16]Jean-Pierre Laviec, Protection et Promotion des Investissements:Etude de Droit International Economique 9 (1985), cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 146.
[17]Preston M. Torbert, Globalizing Legal Drafting:What the Chinese can Teach Us about Ejusdem Generis and All That, Scribes Journal of Legal Writing,2007, p44-45.
[8]赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996:26.
[19]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[20]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 28.
[21]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004,p11.
[22]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 29.
[23]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 29.
[24]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 30.
[25]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p9.
1261 Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000)
[27]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 9-10.
[28]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 15.
[29]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 17.
[30]United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards,1963, p.109,110, cited from above note, at 18.
[31]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21.
[32]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[33]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 19-20.
[34]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 21.
[35]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 36.
[36]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008.
[37]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 18.2.
[38]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 18.3.
[39]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 172.
[40]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 174-175.
[41]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 179.
[42]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. and Italstrade S.p.A. v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13), Decision on Jurisdiction of November 29,2004.
[43]Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24), Decision on Jurisdiction of February 8,2005.
[44]Telenor v. Hungary, Award of September 13,2006, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/15.
[45]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 197.
[46]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343.
[47]李萍.NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[M].北京：中国政法大学,2003:54.
[48]陈安.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:187.
[49]陈安.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:187.
[50]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ)., UN,1999, at 7.
[51]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,2001：106.
[52]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,2001:107-112.
[53]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006.
[54]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 178.
[55]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award. Apr.21,2006, para 178.
[56]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004. Award, Apr.21,2006, para 181.
[57]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 4 of Separate Opinion by Weiler.
[58]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 19 of Separate Opinion by Weiler.
[59]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007.
[60]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 126.
[61]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 128.
[62]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 130.
[63]Roslnvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005. Award on Jurisdiction.Oct.2007, para 135.
[64]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008.
[65]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 159.3.
[66]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 160.
[67]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 162.
[68]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 163.
[69]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 166.
[70]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 167.
[71]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 162.
[72]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 14.
[1]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004),at 5, available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[2]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004),at 5, available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[3]资料来源,商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/av/200212/20021200058403.html,2009/12/9访问.
[4]李萍.NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2003:54.
[5]Article 1108 of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at
http://www.sice.oas.ore/trade/nafta/chap-111.asp#A1108. as of 2009/12/16. [6] Annex Ⅳ of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/anx4cda.asp#Annex_Ⅳ, as of 2009/12/16.
[7]Annex Ⅲ of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/anx3mex.asp#Annex Ⅲ, as of 2009/12/17.
[8]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004), at 7.
[9]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:308.
[10]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：8-9.
[11]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：287.
[12]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[13]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：296.
[14]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:296-297.
[15]吉顺平.WTO不同领域最惠国待遇的比较研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:48.
[16]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京： 法律出版社,2000:288.
[17]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:300.
[18]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:295.
[19]对对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:298.
[20]在GATT中有些条款是明文作为最惠国规则的例外的,如地20条(一般例外)、第21条(安全例外)、暗示含有最惠国例外的则有第24条(关税联盟)、第12条(国际收支失衡的数量限制)；在程序上允许引用作出例外处理的,有地25条第5款(免除义务)、第33条(按议定条件加入)和第35条(一国得不同意对加入国适用总协定)。引自赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,1996:66.
[21]区域一休化例外也是GATT例外中最突出、最困难的问题。GATT第24条规定了关税同盟和自由贸易区及其与两者有关的临时安排。该条款为各种优惠协议留下了一个极大的漏洞。因此,GATT对于关税同盟、自由贸易区的例外规定了若干重要限制。...乌拉圭回合的成果包含了一项“GATT1994第24条的解释谅解书”。谈判代表们希望达成该谅解书,以解决上述有些问题。...非常重要的是,该谅解书还规定,涉及到与关税同盟、自由贸易区或临时安排有关的第24条问题,可援用GATT 1994的争端解决条款。引自约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2001:185-187.
[22]See:Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General, The Future of the WTO 21-23 (Dec.2004), available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto e/10anniv e/10anniv e.htm.
[23]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995).
[24]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 5.
[25]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 7-8.
[26]薛林.论GATT第24条对RTAs十区域经济一体化的规范[J],广西政法十部管理学院学报,2006(4)：111-112.
[27]Agreements that have been submitted for review by GATT Working Parties and by the Committee are listed in Annexes to this document. See also WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, Mapping of Regional Trade Agreements, WT/REG/W/41 (Oct.11,2000), available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm.
[28]John H. Jackson, (2002) The Jurisprudence of GATT&the WTO—Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations,Higher education Press, p107.
[29]从GATT到WTO共有三个案件涉及GATT第24条,分别是1996年的土耳其案、1996年墨西哥海关估价案和1998年阿根廷鞋类保障措施案,其中最重要的是土耳其案。
[30]See http://rtais.wto.org/UI/publicsummarytable.aspx,as of 2009/10/5.
[31]闫鸿鹂.双边FTA与WTO的关系研究[J],贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),2007(6):27.
[32]参见United Nations Centreon Transnational Corporation:《BilateralInvestmentTreaties}) Published in 1988 by Graham & Trotman Limited, P187、195;转引自牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000：95.
[33]资料来源：商务部中国自由贸易区服务网,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand_xieyi.shtml.2009/12/18访问。
[34]Cf. ADF Group, Inc. v. United States, Final Award, Jan.9,2003, Para 76-87,104-07,6 ICSID Rep.470 (W. Bank 2003).
[35]Cf. ADF Group, Inc. v. United States, Final Award, Jan.9,2003, Para 76-87,104-07,6 ICSID Rep.470 (W. Bank 2003), para 196.
[36]该条约因为只有十年的有效期,加上捷克和斯洛伐克在1992年的分裂,所以应该已经失效。而中国与捷克共和国在2005年签订的新的双边投资保护协定中该条款已经有了一些变化,该协定第三条第7款规定：本条中的最惠国待遇条款不得适用于为便利小规模边境贸易而获得的优惠。资料来源：商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058392.html,2009/12/19访问。
[37]参见赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996:15.
[38]范剑虹.国际投资法导读[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2000:330.
[39]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:96.
[40]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p523.
[41]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p523.
[42]See CMS Gas Transm. Co. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, Award, May 12,2005, para.377 (W. Bank 2005).
[43]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p522.
[44]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007.
[45]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 135.
[46]本文在第二章中通过对国际投资协定的分析,除了双边税收协定中一股没有最惠国条款外,其他所有类型的双边和多边投资协定中都包含了最惠国条款,包括经合组织的MAI草案。
[47]正因为最惠国条款在表述(wording)上的差异,所以造成对最惠国条款的不同理解。在Wintershall公司诉阿根廷案中,仲裁庭引用了联合国秘书长在其1949年的《备忘录》中的一句话：“对于最惠国条款的不同解释在当时造成了很多困难,即使现在,情况也还是这样。”(Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 177)
[48]在胡盛涛所写的《寻求投资开放与国家安全的新平衡—美国境内外资并购中的国家安全审查制度及其对中国立法的借鉴》一文中,作者认为：在迪拜港口并购案中,美国当局关于港口所有权从一个外资公司转移到另外一个外资公司并不形成安全隐患,甚至还有利于加强安全控制的结论是正确的。但是,在公众的压力下,众多国会议员坚持认为把美国港口交给阿联酋公司经营将威胁国际安全,从而推翻了美国外国投资委员会允许并购的决定。该文引自陈安主编《国际经济法学刊》第14卷第1期(2007),北京大学出版社,2007年第一版,第31页。
[49]See Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco(Fr. V. U.S.),1952 I.C.J.176,192(Aug.27).
[50]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:33.
[51]例如,外资给阿根廷带来了20世纪90年代中期的繁荣。阿根廷曾一度被西方发达国家誉为“拉丁美洲自由化改革的明星”,然而到21世纪初,阿根廷却不得不面对一场严重的经济危机。2001年12月,阿根廷政府宣布无力偿还1410亿美元的国家债务。2001年11月30日,阿根廷爆发大规模的银行挤兑潮,政府被迫采取紧急措施包括限制居民银行提款和资金流出境外。为了应对危机,阿根廷政府又通过了一系列法令,试图减轻危机的影响。然而这些措施的实行,同时给那些曾积极参与阿根廷私有化进程的外资带来不利影响。因此,自2001年美国CMS公司在ICSID提起针对阿根廷的第一起仲裁申请以来,共有30多家投资于阿根廷公用事业领域的外商在ICSID提起了针对阿根廷的仲裁申请。截止到2006年11月11日,在ICSID103件未决案中就有36件以阿根廷为被告,竞占到所有未决案件的34%。被告如此集中于一国并导致“群起而攻之”的现象,不但在《ICSID公约》及其仲裁体制诞生四十年来所从未见过,而且即使在近现代整个国际仲裁制度的发展史上,也可谓空前未有!且这些仲裁申请要求贴偿的数额巨大,例如仅CMS要求赔偿的数额就达2.66亿美元。如果这些案件悉数败诉的话,阿根廷将面临一连串数额惊人的赔偿。阿根廷刚刚复苏的经济将面临一场更为严峻的考验。引自刘京莲.阿根廷经济危机后的“国际投资法律危机”研究——兼及对中国的借鉴意义[J],太平洋学报,2006(6)：19.也请参见江时学.阿根廷危机的来龙去脉[J],国际经济评论,2002(Z1)：36-38.
[52]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p567.
[1]刘笋.国际投资保护的国家法制—若干重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:347.
[2]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[3]GATT 1994,第一条,参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.
[4]GATS,第五条,参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[Ml.北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[5]根据《建立WTO协定》第10条第2款,对GATS第二条第一款的修订,只有当所有成员均接受后才能生效,这意味着,最惠国待遇条款作为GATS的重要规定,对其修订需要取得所有成员的一致同意。参见石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:60.
[6]根据GATS第1条第2款,“服务贸易”为(a)自领十一成员领土向任何其他成员领土提供服务；(b)在一成员领土内向任何其他成员的服务消费者提供服务；(c)一成员的服务提供者通过在任何其他成员领土内的商业存在提供服务；(d)一成员的服务提供者通过在任何其他成员领土内的自然人存在提供服务;
[7]GATS第28条中的注12规定：如该服务不是由法人直接提供,而是通过分支机构或代表处等其他形式的商业存在提供,则该服务提供者(即该法人)仍应通过该商业存在被给予在本协定项下给予服务提供者的待遇。此类待遇应扩大至提供该服务的存在方式,但不需扩大至该服务提供者位于提供服务的领十以外的任何其他部分。
[8]余劲松.中国涉外经济法律问题新探[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1999:7.
[9]张若思.不难理解的难题—WTO新一轮服务贸易谈判中的人员跨界流动[J].国际贸易,2003(4):42.
1101 See Yi Wang, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment under the General Agreement on Trade in Services and its Application in Financial Services, Journal of World Trade, Vol.30, No.1,1994, at 99.
[11]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[12]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[13]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本 [M].北京：法律出版社,2000:296.
[14]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:288.
[15]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本
[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:295.
[16]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本
[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：298.
[17]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:65-66.
[18]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:66-67.
1191 Preview of the Panel Report, WT/DS27/R/USA, http://docsonline.wto.org/, as of 2010/7/20.
[20]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.274.
[21]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.275.
[22]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.304.
[23]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.299.
[24]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 300.
[25]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 301.
[26]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 302.
[27]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 303.
[28]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R, para 229.
[29]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R, para 231.
[30]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R,para 234.
[31]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R,para 2.19-29.
[32]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R,para 1.2-1.6.
[33]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.236.
[34]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.237.
[35]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.237.
[36]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.253.
[37]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.254.
[38]Appellate report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, para 174.
[39]Appellate report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, para 182.
[40]石静霞.WIO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:94.
[41]See http://rtais.wto.org/UI/publicsummarytable.aspx, as of 2009/10/5.
[42]On the current multilateral negotiations under the aegis of the WTO known as the Doha Round, see, Frances Williams & Guy de Jonquieres, Top WTO Nations Hail Deal on Doha, Financial Times, Aug.2,2004, at 1.
[43]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[44]See:Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General, The Future of the WTO 21-23 (Dec.2004), available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/10anniv_e/10anniv_e.htm。
[45]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[46]GATS,第二条,]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[47]TRIPs,第四条,]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[48]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995).
[49]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995). at 5.
[50]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 7-8
[51]薛林.论GATT第24条对RTAs十区域经济一体化的规范[J].广西政法十部管理学院学报,2006(4):111-112.
[52]Agreements that have been submitted for review by GATT Working Parties and by the Committee are listed in Annexes to this document. See also WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, Mapping of Regional Trade Agreements, WT/REG/W/41 (Oct.11,2000), available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm.
[53]刘瑛.关贸总协定第24条解读-规则、案例和展望[J].国际贸易问题,2006(2):110.
[54]John H. Jackson, (2002) The Jurisprudence of GATT&the WTO—Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations,Higher education Press, p107.
[55]曾令良.区域贸易协定的最新趋势及其对多哈发展议程的负面影响[J].法学研究,2004(5):127.
[56]Sydney M. Cone, Ⅲ, The promotion of free-trade areas viewed in terms of most-favored-nation treatment and "imperial preference", Michigan Journal of International Law Winter 2005, p581.
[57]闫鸿鹂.双边FTA1与WTO的关系研究[J].贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),2007(6)：27.
[58]《中国-新加坡自由贸易协定》第一条。资料来源：http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/
[59]《中国-新加坡自由贸易协定》第一百六十一条第二、三款规定：“二、各方重申对《TRIPS协定及双方参加的与知识产权相关的其他多边协定的承诺。三、为本章之日的,《TRIPS协定》经必要修改后并入本协定,构成本协定的一部分。资料来源同上。
[60]关于NAFTA的文本,笔者参考的文本来自http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/naftatce.asp。
[61]《中国-巴基斯坦自由贸易协定》,资料来源：http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/。
[62]傅明、张讷：《论〈北美自由贸易协定〉之分散型争端解决机制》,载陈安.国际经济法学刊.第13卷第2期[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:309.
[63]高永富.中国参与制定区域贸易协定争端解决机制初探》[J].世界经济研究,2008(7):58.
[64]两个分协定是指《北美环境合作协定》(NAAEC)和《北美劳T合作协定》(NAALC)两个协定。参见高永富.中国参与制定区域贸易协定争端解决机制初探》[J].世界经济研究,2008(7):58.
[65]史晓丽.区域贸易协定争端解决机制中的“场所选择条款”探析[J].政法论坛,2008(2):110.
[66]如中国—新西兰FTA第一条,NAFTA第一条等。
[1]资料来源：1991年至2007年国家统计局全国年度统计公报的相关数据,http://www. stats.gov.cn/tjgb,转引自巫云仙.改革开放以来我国引进和利用外资政策的历史演进[J].中共党史研究,2009(7)：30-32.
[2]资料来源：国家商务部网站：http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/v/v.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[3]资料来源：国家商务部网站http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/201002/20100206785656.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[4]资料来源：国家商务部网站http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/201006/20100606976053.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[5]梁咏.中国投资者海外投资法律保障制度研究[D].上海：复旦大学,2009:11-12.
[6]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20090225 102490.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[7]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/iwtztj/t20090722 108774.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[8]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20090722 108774.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[9]卢勇进、余劲松、齐春生.国际投资协定与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:99.
[10]数据来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/column/2010.shtml,2010/7/12.
[11]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[12]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[13]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[14]中华人民共和国商务部条法司,《中华人民共和国政府和德意志联邦共和国政府关于鼓励和相互保护投资协定》,资料来源：http://tfs.mofcom. gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html.
[15]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058418.html,2010/7/17.
[16]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058415.html,2010/7/17.
[17]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058407.html,2010/7/17.
[18]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/200212/20021200058344.html,2010/7/17.
[19]资料来源：商务部中国自由贸易区服务网http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xievi.shtml,2010/7/17.
[20]资料来源：商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/aw/201002/20100206778962.html,2010/7/17.
[21]Cai Congyan, China—Us Bit Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,475/.
[22]阿根廷在2001年爆发金融危机,政府宣布无力偿还近千亿美元的外债。阿政府在2005年进行大规模债务重组,但是仍然有部分态度强硬的债权人拒绝接受重组方案。他们采取各种司法手段向阿政府施加压力,包括向美国联邦法院起诉阿根廷政府,要求按照原先的契约偿还债务。同时,自2001年美国CMS公司在ICSID提起针对阿根廷的第一起仲裁申请以米,共有30多家投资于阿根廷公用事业领域的外商在ICSID提起了针对阿根廷的仲裁申请。截止到2006年11月11日,在ICSID103件未决案中就有36件以阿根廷为被告,竟占到所有未决案件的34%。被告如此集中于一国并导致“群起而攻之”的现象,不但在《ICSID公约》及其仲裁体制诞生四十年来所从未见过,而且即使在近现代整个国际仲裁制度的发展史上,也可谓空前未有!且这些仲裁申请要求赔偿的数额巨大,例如仅CMS要求赔偿的数额就达2.66亿美元。如果这些案件悉数败诉的话,阿根廷将面临一连串数额惊人的赔偿。
[23]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/200212/20021200058349.html,2010/7/27.
[24]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. II), UN publication,1999, at 51.
[25]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[26]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京人学出版社,2006:110.
[27]一些多边条约尤其是区域性条约本身包含了对仲裁的同意,比如NAFTA第1122条规定“各成员方根据本协议规定同意将争议提交仲裁”,第1120条进一步规定“投资者可以将争议提交ICSID或ICSID附加便利仲裁,或根据UNICITRAL规则进行仲裁。”能源宪章条约(Energy Charter Treaty)第26条3款a项规定
“各成员国无条件同意将争议付诸国际仲裁解决。”根据ECT的规定,投资者可以将争端提交ICSID或ICSID附加便利仲裁,根据UNICITRAL规则进行仲裁,或提交斯德哥尔摩商事仲裁院进行仲裁。参见湛茜.论ICSID仲裁中当事方的“同意”[J].北京仲裁,2010(1):81-85.[28]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:110.
[29]崔彦坤.中国缔结双边投资协定的新发展——从新旧中德双边投资保护与促进协定的比较的视角分析[J].法制与社会,2007,(3)：706.
[30]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:110.
[31]王海浪.“落后”还是“超前”—论中国对ICSID管辖权的同意[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:164.
[32]但这些条约并未引起学者的关注,中德条约之所以引起国内外法学理论界河实务界的特别关注,主要是：一方面,德国是新型双边投资协定的首创国,缔约理论和实践丰富,另一方面,中德条约是典型的发达国家与发展中国家间的条约,且德国在中国有大量累积投资,这使中德双边投资协定具有较强的现实意义,
不致像有些条约那样仅仅成为两国政治友好的一种象征而无相应的投资可供保护。参见崔彦坤.中国缔结双边投资协定的新发展——从新旧中德双边投资保护与促进协定的比较的视角分析[J].法制与社会,2007,(3)：706.
[33]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/201002/20100206778924.html,2010/7/27。
[34][34]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/bk/200212/20021200058357.html,2010/7/27。
1351 Cai Congyan, China—Us Bit Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,487/.
[36]参见新华网：http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2007-12/14/content 7248016,htm,2010/7/28.
[37]参见美国驻中国大使馆网站：http://chinese.usembassy-china.org.cn/062008sed4.html,2010/7/28.
[38]潘锐,娄亚萍.中美双边投资保护协定谈判的演进与发展[J].国际观察,2010,(1):64.
[39]参见人民网：http://world.people.com.cn/GB/11694519.html,2010/7/28.
[40]马鑫.中美投资谈判较劲国民待遇,难规避美国外资审查[J].国家财经周刊,2010年6月21日,转引自新浪网：http://finance.sina.com.cn/j/20100621/16508148817.shtml,2010/7/29.
[41]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343,2010/7/29.
[42]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资协定与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf, as of 2009/7/21.
[43]资料来源,国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html,2010/7/29.
[44]马鑫.中美投资谈判较劲国民待遇,难规避美国外资审查[J].国家财经周刊,2010年6月21日,转引自新浪网：http://finance.sina.com.cn/i/20100621/16508148817.shtml,2010/7/29访问。
[45]田丰.中美双边投资协定最中国的影响—基于美国双边投资协定范本(2004)的分析[J].当代亚太,2010(3)：84.
[46]如中国和芬兰BIT中第三条投资待遇规定：“缔约一方给予缔约另一方投资者投资的待遇,根据投资者的选择,应是本条第二款和第三款规定的待遇中更优惠的待遇”。资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200504/20050400033864.html,2010/7/29.
[1]王毅.论最惠国条款适用中的同类规则[J].国际贸易问题,1988:6-7.
[2]徐曾沧、李华.论“资本控制说”在国际投资法中的新应用[J].国际贸易问题,1998(3)
[3]姚梅镇.国际投资中的法律保护[J].国际法年刊,1982.
[4]王暄.国家对自然资源的永久主权[J].中国国际法年刊,1982.
[5]余劲松.论国际投资法的新近发展[J].法学评论,1997(6).
[6]邹立刚.多边投资担保机构公约评析[J].中国国际法年,1992.
[7]李华.浅析GATS中的最惠国待遇[J].法制与经济(下半月),2007(7)
[8]黄婷GATS最惠国待遇的经济分析[J].法制与社会,2008(10)
[9]钟祥喜.两难中的WT0最惠国待遇原则[J].法制与社会,2008(7)
[10]何光群.国际投资协定中最惠国待遇条款的适用比较[J].贵州财经学院学报,2007(6).
[11]姚静.试论区域贸易安排与WTO最惠国待遇原则之关系[J].法制与社会,2007(3).
[12]李良才.经济全球化背景下最惠国待遇条款的新发展[J].湖南财经高等专科学校学报,2007(1)
[13]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)
[14]李兰花GATT1994最惠国待遇原则适用辨析——以我国的第一例被中诉案为例[J].石家庄学院学报,2007年(1)
[15]金卫星.中美关系史上围绕最惠国待遇问题的三次缔约谈判[J].江海学刊,2006(4).
[16]龙英锋.WTO协定中的国内税最惠国待遇探疑[J].税务研究,2005(9).
[17]孙君健.克林顿总统时期美国对华政策形成的特点一以总统、国会在对华贸易最惠国待遇问题上的争论为例[J].史学月刊,2005(6).
[18]高心湛. “最惠国待遇”的源流及其他[J].历史教学,2005(2)
[19]李燕妙.《服务贸易总协定》中的最惠国待遇原则[J].中山大学研究生学刊,2004(2).
[20]褚晓琳.从加拿大影响汽车产业措施案析最惠国待遇原则的适用[J].山西省政法管理干部学院学报,2004(2).
[21]白丹桂.投资协议中的最惠国待遇[J].科技创业月刊,2004(4).
[22]张卫华.试析最惠国待遇原则及国民待遇原则在《SPS协定》中的适用[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2003(5).
[23]白艳GATS最惠国待遇制度探微[J].社会科学研究,2003(3).
[24]唐慧俊.关于最惠国待遇的公平性问题[J].理论探索,2003(6).
[25]宋晓.论双边投资条约对国际投资法的发展：中国视角[J].江苏行政学院学报,2005(6):96—100.
[26]魏卿,姜立文.双边投资协定的经济分析[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2005,45(2):28—33.
[27]沈慧骅.国家和私人间投资争端解决机制的冲突和协调—兼比较WTO与ICSID争端解决机制的冲突与协调[J].当代法学,2003(11):107—112·
[28]颜晓晖,刘旭友.中国一东盟相互直接投资政治风险的法律防范体系构建[J].云南财经大学学报,2(X)7(8):7—12.
[29]高建明.论中国投资者在东盟的投资保障[J].贵州瞥官职业学院学报,2007(5):85—86.
[30]白萌.禁止履行要求的出现及对我国国际投资发展的意义[J].理论探索,2004(5):72—73,76.
[31]顾微微,张异和.多边投资条约下的外国投资准入自由化研究[J].政法学刊,2006(3):76—81.
[32]肖军.对海外投资的外交保护一国际法院关于迪亚洛案(初步反对意见)的判决评析[J].武大国际法评论,2008(2):338—350.
[33]李俊义.《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》与中国之应对[J].法治论丛,2008(5):63-一石7.
[34]孔小霞.海外中国国民权益保护的国际法思考[J].兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2008(6):95一-99.
[35]孔小霞.论外交保护制度的发展—兼评《外交保护条款草案》[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008(4):137-139.
[36]肖爱华.国家豁免主体的特殊问题研究—解读2004年《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》中国国有企业法律地位问题[J].法制与社会,2008(6):9—10.
[37]黄涧秋.论外交保护制度中的公司国籍规则—2004年联合国国际法委员会《外交保护条款草案》述评[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2007(11):85—89·
[38]杨卫东,郭堃.论投资者功能性国籍冲突及其解决—基于中外双边投资保护协定的分析[J].华北电力大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4):67—72.
[39]黄涧秋.论外交保护中的用尽当地救济规则—兼评2006年联合国《外交保护条款草案》[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2008(5):43—46.
[40]熊志银.关于我国海外投资保障制度的若干问题[J].东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2(Ⅹ)4(3)：15—18.
[41]余劲松《TRIMS协议》研究[J].法学评论,2001(2):97—103.
[42]刘笋.补贴与国际投资的关系及与国际立法趋势的冲突[J].法律科学,2003(2):94—103.
[43]余劲松,梁丹妮.公平公正待遇的最新发展动向及我国的对策[J].法学家,2007(6):151—156.
[44]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究—由NAFTA的实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005(6):41—48.
[45]向玉兰.“BIT条款”和“协议条款”对ICSID管辖权的影响[J].法学杂志,2006(1):127—129.
[46]刘志云.略论经济主权与中外双边投资条约[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2000(1):45—49.
[47]沈四宝,伏军.构建我国境外投资促进立法的若干思考[J].法学家,2006(4):121—127.
[48]谢舟.未来中国“海外投资者”法律定义之考量[J].绍兴文理学院学报,2005,25(3):48—50,54.
[49]徐曾沧,李华.论“资本控制说”在国际投资法中的新应用[J].国际商务研究,1998(2):55—60.
[1]周鲤生.国际法.[M].北京：北京商务印书馆,1981.
[2]王铁崖.国际法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1995.
[3]邓正来.王铁崖文选.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[4]朱奇武.中国国际法的理论与实践.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[5]梁淑英.国际公法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[6]柳炳华著.国际法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[7]周忠海.国际经济关系中的法律问题.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[8]姚梅镇.国际经济法概论.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1989.
[9]高树异.国际经济法总论.[M].吉林：吉林大学出版社,1989.
[10]张月蛟.国际经贸法律评析与运用.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1997.
[11]王传丽.国际贸易法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1995.
[12]韩德培.国际私法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1983.
[13]钱弊.国际私法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.
[14]刘振江.国际私法.[M].兰州：兰州大学出版社,1988.
[15]姚梅镇.国际投资法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1994.
[16]姚梅镇.比较外资法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1993.
[17]姚梅镇.海外投资法律实务.[M].北京：法律出版社,1993.
[18]姚梅镇.外商投资企业法教程.[M].北京：法律出版社,1994.
[19]沈四宝.国际投资法.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1990.
[20]王贵国.国际投资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1990.
[21]余劲松.国际投资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1994.
[22]徐崇利、林忠.中国外资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[23]刘丰名.股份公司与合资企业法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[24]陈安.美国对海外投资的法律保护及其典型案例分析.[M].北京：鹭江出版社,1985.
[25]于安.外商投资特许权项目协议(BOT)与行政合同法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[26]江前良.国际BOT方式理论与实务.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1996.
[27]赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制.[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996.
[28]薛荣久.世界贸易组织与中国大经贸发展.[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,1997.
[29]滕维藻.走向国际市场一战后世界经济三大支柱.[M].贵州：贵州人民出版社1997.
[30]汪尧田.走向国际市场一世界贸易组织惯例与中国涉外经贸.[M].贵州：贵州人民出版社,1997.
[31]汪尧田,周汉民.世界贸易组织总论.[M].上海：上海远东出版社,1995.
[32]曾令良.世界贸易组织法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1999.
[33]任泉著.GATT乌拉卡回合内幕.[M].北京：世界知识出版社,1996.
[34]李东阳.当代西方国际投资学.[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,1994.
[35]马野青,张二震.国际贸易学.[M].南京：南京大学出版社,1998.
[36]王新奎.国际贸易与国际投资中的利益分配.[M].上海：上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1995.
[37]国际经济贸易规范研究课题组编.国际经济贸易规则、惯例通编.[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,1993.
[38]陈安,刘智中.国际经济法资料选编.[M].北京：法律出版社,1991年版.
[39]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.
[40]李光文,杨柱才.国际经贸、政治、军事事务规则公约大全.[M].南宁:广西民族出版社,1994.
[41]国际经济贸易规范研究课题组.国际经济贸易规则惯例通编—乌拉圭回合专辑.[M].北京：新华出版社,1995.
[42]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践.[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007.
[43]卢劲勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论.[M].北京：人民出版社,2007.
[44]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论.[M].北京：法律出版社,2006年版.
[45]梁丹妮.<北美自由贸易协定>投资争端仲裁机制研究.[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.
[46]邵沙平.国际法院新近案例研究.[M].北京：商务印书馆,2006.
[47]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制—若干重要法律问题研究.[M].北京：法律出版社,2002.
[48]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2007.
[49]叶兴平.国际争端解决机制的最新发展—北美自由贸易区的法律与实践.[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.
[50]李贵英.国际投资法专论—国际投资争端之解决.[M].北京：元照出版公司,2004.
[51]〔美〕约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制一国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001.
[1]黎辉.多边投资担保机构公约与中国[A].见：黄炳坤.中国涉外经济法律问题[M].南宁:广西人民出版社,1991.
[1].联合国网站,网址Http://www.un.org
[2].中国与东盟自由贸易区网站,网址Http://www.cafta.com.cn
[3].经济合作与发展组织网站,网址Http://www.oecd.org
[4].中华人民共和国商务部网站,网址Http://www.moftec.gov.cn
[5].中华人民共和国国家税务总局网站,网址：Http://www.chinatax.gov.cn
[6].中国知网网站,网址：Http://www.cnki.net
[1]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000：
[2]李萍NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2003:
[3]吉顺平.WTO不同领域最惠国待遇的比较研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:
[4]蔺志军. 双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:
[5]褚晓琳.世界贸易组织(WTO)中的最惠国待遇研究[D].山东：山东大学,2005:
[6]韩悦GATS最惠国待遇条款法律分析[D].武汉：武汉大学,2004:
[7]薛锋. 论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:
[1]国家发展和改革委员会投资公司,国家发展和改革委员会投资研究所,国家统计局投资统计司.中国投资报告(2006)[R].北京：中国计划出版社,2006.
[2]联合国贸易和发展会议.竞争[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[3]联合国贸易和发展会议.国际合同[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[4]联合国贸易和发展会议.透明度[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[51联合国贸易和发展会议.鼓励措施[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[6]联合国贸易和发展会议.国际投资协议的关键术语和概念[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[7]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2003年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2004.
[8]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2004年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2005.
[9]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2005年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2006.
[10]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2006年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2007.
[11]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2007年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2008.
[12]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2008年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2009.
[13]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2009年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2010.
[1]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第9卷)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[2]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第10卷)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[3]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[4]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第2期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[6]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[7]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第2期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[8]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[9]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第4期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[10]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第14卷第1期)[G]北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[11]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第14卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[12]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第15卷第1期)IGI.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[1]. Sir Thomas Barclay, Effect Of "Most-Favored-Nation" Clause In Commercial Treaties, Yale Law Journal November,1907.
[2]. Stanley K. Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause (pt.1),3 Am. J. Int'l L.395, 395 (1909).
[3]. Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y. B. Int'l L. Comm'n157,159, U. N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.
[4]. Stephen W. Schill, Multilateral zing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009.
[5]. Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125, 130 (2007).
[6]. Yannick Radi, The Application of the Most-favored-nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties:Domesticating the'Trojan Horse', European Journal of International Law, September,2007.
[7]. William Thomas Worster, Conflicts Between United States Immigration Law And The General Agreement On Trade In Services:Most-Favored-Nation Obligation Texas International Law Journal Fall 2006.
[8]. Randall Green, Human Rights And Most-Favored-Nation Tariff Rates For Products From The People's Republic Of China, University of Puget Sound Law Review Spring,1994.
[9]. Marian Nash Leich, Diplomatic Privileges And Immunities (U. S. Digest, Ch.4, S2) Most-Favored-Nation Status, American Journal of International Law April,1983.
[10]. Kathryn E. Spier, "Tied To The Mast":Most-Favored-Nation Clauses In Settlement Contracts, Journal of Legal Studies January,2003.
[11]. Anthony J. Dennis, Most Favored Nation Contract Clauses Under The Antitrust Laws, University of Dayton Law Review Spring,1995.
[12]. Warren F. Schwartz, Alan O. Sykes, Toward A Positive Theory Of The Most Favored Nation Obligation And Its exceptions In The WTO/GATT System, International Review of Law and Economics March,1996
[13]. George W. Kofler, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In Direct Taxation:Does EC Law Provide For Community MFN In Bilateral Double Taxation Treaties?, Houston Business and Tax Law Journal 2005.
[14]. Stirling Adams, Negotiating A Commercial "Most Favored Nation" Clause, International Law & Management Review Spring,2005.
[15]. Gabriel Egli, Don't Get Bit:Addressing ICSID's Inconsistent Application Of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses To Dispute Resolution Provisions, Pepperidge Law Review,2007.
[16]. Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008.
[17]. Sydney M. Cone, The Promotion Of Free-Trade Areas Viewed In Terms Of Most-Favored-Nation Treatment And "Imperial Preference", Michigan Journal of International Law Winter 2005.
[18]. Charles E. Reynolds, the Most Favored Nation Clause:The Ultimate Double Edged Sword, Defense Counsel Journal, January 2007.
[19]. Dolzer, Rudolf and Myers, Terry. "After Tecmed:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements",19 ICSID Review-FILJ 49 (2004).
[20]. Ehring, Lothar. "De Facto Discrimination in World Trade Law" 36 (5) Journal of World Trade 921. (2002)
[21]. Freyer, Dana H. and Herlihy, David. "Most-Favored Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How'Favored'is'Most-Favored'? 20 ICSID Review-FIJL 58(2005).
[1]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007.
[2]. Ralph H. Folsom, Michael W. Gordon, John A. Spanogle:International Trade and Investment (2th Edition), Law Press, Beijing,2004. (photocopy)
[1]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2003.
[2]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2004.
[3]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2005.
[4]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2006.
[5]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2007.
[6]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2008.
[7]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2009.
[8]. Foreign Direct Investment and Performance Requirements:New Evidence from Selected Countries, United Nations, New York and Geneva,2003.
[9]. International Investment Arrangements:Trends and Emerging Issues (UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development), United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2005.
[10]. Investor-State Disputes Arising from Investment Treaties:A Review (UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development), United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2006.
[11]. Investment Policy Review—Egypt edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,1999.
[12]. Investment Policy Review—Uzbekistan edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,1999.
[13]. Investment Policy Review—Uganda edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,2000.
[14]. Current Issues on Industry, Trade and Investment No.1 Edited by Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, New York, United Nations,2003.
[15]. OECD. "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004). Working Papers on International Investment Number 2004/2.
[16]. UNCTAD. "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol.Ⅲ).
[17]. Yanai, Akiko. "The Function of the MFN clause in the Global Trading System" (2002). Working Paper Series 01/02-No.3, APEC Study Center Institute of Developing Economies.
[18]. Maffezini v. Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision on Jurisdiction, (2000).
[19]. Siemens A. G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004).
[20]. Salini Costruttori S. p. A v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction, (2004).
[21]. Palma Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, (2005).
[22]. Asian Agricultural Products v. Sri Lanka, ICSID Case No. ARB/87/3, Final Award, (1991).
[23]. Yaung Chi Oo Trading v. Myanmar, ASEAN Case No. ARB/01/1, Award, (2003).
[24]. Tecmed v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/00/2, Award, (2003).
[25]. Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, (2008).
[1]http://www.westlaw.com
[2]http://www.un.org
[3]http://:www.wto.org
[4]http://www.miga.com
[5]http://www.unctad.org
[6]http://www.icsid.org
[7]http://www.oecd.org
[8]http://www.worldbank.org
[9]http://www.investmentclaims.com
[2]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ),UN,1999.
[3]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, Nn 2004\2
[4]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p2.
[5]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10) A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第3页。
[6]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10) A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第7-8页。
[7]联合国文件《大会正式记录,第六十三届会议,补编第10号》(A/64/10),第211-216段)。
[8]联合国文件《大会正式记录,第六十三届会议,补编第10号》(A/64/10),第211-216段)。
[9]吴昆吾《最惠国条款问题》,外交部条约委员会印行,1929年3月。该文献藏于上海图书馆近代文献库。
[10]该文章载于《王铁崖文集》,邓正来编[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
1 Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No. 3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[1]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, para 10根据经济合作组织2004年的报告,最惠国条款起源于十二世纪,seeMost-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No2004\2。但笔者认为这个细节并不影响对该问题的讨论。
[2]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, para 10.
[3]Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause in Commercial Treaties:Its Function in Theory and Practice and Its Relation to Tariff Policies, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, No.343, Economic and Political Science Series, Vol.6,No.2(1910)转引自陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:183。
[4]Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause in Commercial Treaties:Its Function in Theory and Practice and Its Relation to Tariff Policies, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, No.343, Economic and Political Science Series, Vol.6,No.2(1910).转引自陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海:复口.大学出版社,2007:183。
[5]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160.
[6]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160该条约由于英国国会的忧虑而没有通过,理由是与其以前签订的条约义务相违背。直到1786年,英国和法国才签订了一个包含最惠国条款的条约。
[7]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p160.
[8]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), p5.
[9]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L,125,130 (2007), p5.
[10]薛峰.论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:16.
[11]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213, p162.
[12]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:53.
[13]王铁崖.最惠国条款的解释[A].见郑正来.王铁崖文选[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993:504.
[14]薛峰.论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:16.
[15]Stanley K. Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause (pt.2),3 Am. J. Int'l L.619,620-21 (1909).
[16]Letter from Secretary of State John Sherman to William I. Buchanan (Jan.11,1898), in 5 Moore's Digest of International Law 278 (1906), quoted in Hornbeck, supra note 1, at 408.
[17]Boris Nolde, La Clause de la Nation La Plus Favorisee et les Tarifs Preferentiels,39 Recueil des Cours de l'Academie de Droit International 1,91 (1932). Cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, 32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), p6.
[18]Change in Favored-Nation Clauses,5 Hackworth Digest of International Law §502, at 273 (1942), quoted in Endre Ustor, Fourth Report on the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause, [1973] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 97,98, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SER.A/1973.
[19]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 163.
[20]Marian Nash Leich, Diplomatic Privileges And Immunities (U.S. Digest, Ch.4, S2) Most-Favored-Nation Status, American Journal of International Law April,1983.
[21]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 162.
[22]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.at 162.
[23]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54.
[24]Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y.B. Int'l L. Comm'n 157,159, U.N., at 169.
[25]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54.
[26]The Economic Intelligence Unit,'“2010年世界投资前景：繁荣还是衰退?”(World Investment Prospect to 2010 Boom or Backlash?) (Laza Kekic),第22灭。转引自王贵国.国际投资法[M].北京：法律出版社,2008：3.
[27]蔺志军.双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D].北京：中国政法大学.2006:4-5.
[28]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:54-55.
[29]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 5.
[30]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.
[31]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[32]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[33]Article 10 of European Energy Charter Treaty, from The Energy Charter Treaty and Related Documents by Energy Charter Secretariat, available at: http://www.encharter.org/fileadmin/user upload/document/EN.pdf#page=211.
[34]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343, as of 2010/9/2.
[35]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No 2004\2., p3.
[36](美)约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001：178-179.
[37](英)詹宁斯,瓦茨修订,王铁崖等译.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,1995:15.
[38]邵津.国际法[M].北京：北京大学出版社,高等教育出版社,2005: 13.
[39]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No 2004\2., p2.
[40]如《中国-新西兰自由贸易区协定》第十一章第一百三十九条规定：一、各方在准入、扩大、管理、经营、运营、维护、使用、收益或处置方面,应当给予另一方投资者、投资者的投资及与该投资相关的活动,不低于其在同等条件下给予任何第三国投资者的投资及相关活动的待遇。二、为进一步明确,本条规定的义务不包含要求给予另一方投资者除本章规定内容以外的争端解决程序。
[41]See Schwartz. Warren F. and Sykes. Alan 0. " The Economics of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause" in Jagdeep S. Bhandari and Alan O. Sykes(1997), Economic Dimensions in International Law:Comparative and Empirical Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, at 62. Cited form Andrew T. Guzman and Alan O. Sykes(2007), Research Handbook in International Economic Law, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA. USA., at 12.
[42]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M]：长春:吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[43]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].长春：中国政法大学,2000:33.
[44]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), p13.
[45]Andrew T. Guzman and Alan O. Sykes(2007), Research Handbook in International Economic Law, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA. USA., at 13.
[46]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.III),UN,1999. at 9.
[47]引自吴昆吾《最惠国条款问题》,外交部条约委员会印行,1929年3月。该文献藏于上海图书馆近代文献库.
1481 Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD /ITE//IIT/10(Vol.III),UN,1999. at 10.
[49]See Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco(Fr. V. U.S.).1952 I.C.J.176,192(Aug.27
[50]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/1_3.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[51]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/13.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[52]Summary of Most Favored Nation Clause by U.N. International Law Commission, Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/13.htm, visited at 2009/7/17.
[53]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 8.
[54]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 14.
[55]See the following acts of the General Assembly:Res.33/139 (1978),35/161 (1980), and 40/65 (1985), and Decision 43/429 (1988).
[56]See, the comments of Colombia, Netherlands, Sweden in "Comments of Member States, organs of theUnited Nations, specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations on the draft articles on the most-favored-nation clause adopted by the International Law Commission at its twenty-eighth session", in Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1978, Vol. II, Part Two, and Germany in "Analytical compilation of comments and observations from Governments, organs of the United Nations which have competence in the subject-matter and interested intergovernmental organizations:report of the Secretary-General", UN A/35/443, p. 9.
[57]Report on the most-favored-nation clause, by Mr. Nikolai A. Ushakov, special Rapporteur, UN document A/CN.4/309 and Add.1 and 2.
[58]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 16.
[59]陈安主编、蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007：185.
[60]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 18.
[61]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 21.
[62]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 24.
[63]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 25.
[64]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[65]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International
Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[66]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report")UN document A/33/10, at 65.
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 9.[67]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session,Yearbook of the International
[68]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1(Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 68.[69]Reoort of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session,Yearbook of the International
Law Commission,A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1(Part 2)(“ILC Report”)UN document A/33/10,at 69.[70]Report on the most-favored-nation clause,by Mr.Nikolai A.Ushakov,special Rapporteur,UN documents
A/CN.4/309 and Add.1 and 2, at 4. From Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1978, vol. Ⅱ, Part One.
[71]Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Annexes, agenda item 112, document A/32/433,
para.188.
[72]Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Annexes, agenda item 112, document A/32/433,
para.21.[73]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment,UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD
/ITE//ⅡT/10(voL.Ⅲ).UN,1999.
[74]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第3页。
[75]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款T作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第7-8页。
[76]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第9页。
[77]联合国国际法委员会第五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,笫9页。
[78]联合国国际法委员会笫五十九届会议最惠国条款工作组报告,(A/63/10)A/CN.4/L.719,2007,第9页。
[79]Marie-Erance Houde,Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in Intemational Investment Law,OECD Working Paper
No.2004/2.2004.
[80]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p2.
[81]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper
No.2004/2,2004,p16.
[82]联合国国际法委员会第六十三届会议发布的研究报告(大会正式记录补编第10号A/63/10)附件B,第
322页。
[83]联合国国际法委员会第六十三届会议发布的研究报告(大会正式记录补编第10号A/63/10)附件B,第
322页。
[84]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July
22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf.
[85]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf.p.105.
[86]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22), at 102. avialble at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/16/1997.pdf, p.107.
[87]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. (U.K. v. Iran), Judgment on Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection 1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22),
[90]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co.(U.K.v.Iran),Judgment on Jurisdiction,1952 I.C.J.93 (July 22),at 145-147.[91]Anglo-Iranian Oil Co.(U.K.v.Iran),Judgment on Jurisdiction,1952 I.C.J.93(July 22),at 157-158.[92]Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause,by Mr.Endre Ustor,Special Rapporteur,Extract frc Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970,vil.Ⅱ,document::A/CN.4/228 and Add.1,at 204.
[93]Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur, Extract from the
Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document::A/CN.4/228 and Add.1, at 204.
[94]G. Schwarzenberger, International Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals,3rd ed. (London,
Stevens & Sons,1957), p.240, cited form Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor,
Special Rapporteur, Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document::
A/CN.4/228 and Add.1
[95]See Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, Second Session, Summary
records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole (United Nations publication,
Sales No.：E.70.V.6),p.63,para.36.
[96]Case concerning rights of natiods of t h United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952:
I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 6.
[97]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 7.
[98]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 14-16.
[99]Case concerning rights of natiods of th United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 26.
[100]Case concerning rights of natiods of t h United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th,1952: I.C. J. Reports 1952, p.176, at 27.
[101]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. U.K.),1953 I.C.J.10 (May 19).
[102]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction), Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 9.
[103]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction). Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 9-10.
[104]Ambatielos case (jurisdiction). Judgment of July 1st,1952:I.C. J. Reflorts 1952, p.28, at 46.
[105]See United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards,vol. XII, United Nations publication, Sales No.: 1963.V.3),p.91.
[106]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, at 19.
[107]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C.J. Reports 1953, at 20.
[108]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, at 20.
[109]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.364.
[110]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.402.
[111]Ambatielos Case (Greece v. United Kingdom), I.C.J. Pleadings,1953, p.457.
[112]Ambatielos case (merits:obligation to arbitrate), Judgment of May 19th,1953:I.C. J. Reports 1953, p.10, at 34.
[113]G Schwarzenberger, International Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals,3rd ed. (London, Stevens & Sons,1957), p.240. Cited from Second report on the most-favoured-nation clause, by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur, Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1970, vol.Ⅱ, document:: A/CN.4/228 and Add.1., at 211.
[114]United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XII(United Nations publication, Sales No.1963.V.3),p.107.
[1]卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:1.
[2]汪垚.20世纪90年代以来双边投资协定评介及发展趋势研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学,2006:2.
[13]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005), UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 1.
[4]UNCTAD, Bilateral Investment Treaties 1959-1999, UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2, at 1.
[5]UNCTAD, Bilateral Investment Treaties 1959-1999, UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2, at 2.
[6]Developments in international investment agreements in 2005, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2006) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIA/2006/7, at 2.
[7]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2006-June 2007)IIA MONITOR No.3 (2007) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIA/2007/6, at 2-3.
[8]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 2.
[9]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 2-3.
[10]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[11]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 5-6.
[12]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 7.
[13]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 8.
[14]Developments in international investment agreements, IIA MONITOR No.2 (2005) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1, at 9.
[15]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 7.
[16]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 7.
[17]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 8.
[18]World Investment Report 1996, Investment, Trade and International Policy Arrangements, UNCTAD Publications, UN,1996, available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir1996 en.pdf, at 135-139.
[19]范剑虹.国际投资法导读[M].北京：浙江大学出版社,2000: 217.
[20]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制一若十重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:57.
[21]Available at:http://www.oecd.org/document/24/0,3343,en 26493488718757361111,00.html,, as of 2010/1/19。
[22]Available at:http://www.comunidadandina.org/ingles/normativa/d291e.htm, as of 2010/1/19。
[23]Available at:http://www.aseansec.org/6466.htm, as of 2010/1/19。
[24]Available at:http://www.apec.org/apec/business resources.html, as of 2010/1/19。
[25]Available at:htto://www.cvm.gov.br/inel/inter/mercosul/coloni-e.asp.as of 2010/1/19。
[26]Available at:http://www.ftaa-alca.org/NGROUPS/ngin/publications/english99/MERCOSUR.asp, as of 2010/1/19.
[27]曾令良.区域贸易协定的最新趋势及其对多哈发展议程的负面影响[J].法学研究,2004(5):711.
[28]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 8.
[29]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8,at 8.
[30]Recent developments in international investment agreements (2007-June 2008) IIA MONITOR No.2 (2008) International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2008/1, at 9.
[31]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999: 532.
[32]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999: 533-539.
[33]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制—若干重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:21-23.
[34]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[35]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[36]Dr. Efraim Chalamish, The Future of Bilateral Investment Treaties:A de facto Multilateral Agreement? 34 Brook. J. Int'l L.303, at 325.
[37]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 254.
[38]在当前,还只有美国、德国、荷兰和西班牙签订的DTTs中对最忠国待遇有规定,但尚未形成普遍的实践。对国际税收协定中最惠国条款的适用的研究,参见任捷.国际税收协定中最惠国条款的适用[J].法治论从,2006(2)：209-215.
[39]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[40]对对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[41]资料来源：商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html, as of 2009/9/25.
[42]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In International Law, Working Papers on International Investment by OECD, No2004\2., p5.
[43]范剑虹.国际投资发导读[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2000:434435.
[44]两者的区别主要是：参照或对比机制不同;参照对象不同;适用范围不同;例外情形不同等;联系表现在:都是为了实现对外国投资者待遇的非歧视等。参见生光军《国际投资待遇论》,中国政法大学博士论文.
[45]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 32.
[46]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ), UN,1999, at 32.
[47]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ)., UN,1999, at 32.
[48]World Investment Report 1996 Investment, Trade and International Policy Arrangements, United Nations, 1996, at 182. available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir1996_en.pdf.
[49]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999:440.
[50]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 260.
[51]姚梅镇.外商投资企业法教程[M].北京：法律出版社,1990:15.
[52]高永富.国际经济法[M].上海：立信会计图书用品社,1989:234.
[53]范剑虹.国际投资发导读[M].上海：浙汀大学出版社,2000:211.
[54]曾华群.国际投资法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1999:442.
[55]在CME Czech Republic B. V.(The Netherlands) v. Czech Republic案中,仲裁庭战定,若东道国的措施使投资无利可图则违反公平公正待遇原则,除非政府的行为明显是为了公共利益。然而,在Lauder v. Czech Republic案中,仲裁庭裁定,公平公正待遇系国际最低待遇标准,东道国政府为了实施国内法而引起之争议并不违反公平公正待遇原则。见王贵国.国际投资法[M].北京：法律出版社,2008:160 174.
[1]《关税与贸易总协定》(GATT1947)第1条将最惠国条款的待遇限定为：“在对进口或出口、有关进口或出口或对进口或出口产品的国际支付转移所征收的关税和费用方面,在征收此类关税和费用的方法方面,在有关进口和出口的全部规章手续方面,以及在第3条第2款和第4款所指的所有事项方面,任何缔约方给予来自或运往任何其他国家任何产品的利益、优惠、特权或豁免应立即无条件地给予来自或运往所有其他缔约方领土的同类产品。”
[2]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Also see http:/www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.odf.as of 2009/7/21.
131 "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol. Ⅲ), at 6.
[4]詹晓宁,葛顺奇：国际投资协定：投资和投资者的范围与定义[J].国际经济合作,2003(1)：41.
[5]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:41.
[6]詹晓宁,葛顺奇：国际投资协定：投资和投资者的范围与定义[J].国际经济合作,2003(1)：43.
[7]杨卫东.双边投资协定—中国的视角[D].北京：中国社会科学院,2002:38.
[8]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 11.
[9]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 33.
[10]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2009/7/22访问。
[11]协议文本参见商务部网站,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xieyi.shtml,2009/7/22访问.
[12]公约文本参见：http://www.miga.org/quickref/index sv.cfm?stid=1583.
[13]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[14]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 34.
[15]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol.Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 115-117.
[16]ASEAN Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, article 1(3), from UNCTAD,1996, volume Ⅱ,p.294.
[17]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf.as of 2009/7/21.
[18]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 31.
[19]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:304-305.
[20]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 31.
[21]Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/14/13/1935919.pdf, as of 2009/7/23.
[22]陈安,蔡从燕《国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践》[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007,第31页。
[23]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html,2009/7/22访问。
[24]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 375.
[25]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol.Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 122.
[26]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 123.
[27]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 366.
[28]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 125.
[29]International Investment Agreements:Key Issues Volume Ⅰ, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. Ⅰ) UN publications,2004, at 125.
[30]Article 25 of Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, ICSID CONVENTION, Regulations and Rules, ICSID publications, April 2006, available at: http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/StaticFiles/basicdoc/CRR_English-final.pdf.
[31]G R Delaume. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (J). (1996) 1 Intl Layer,转引自胡勇,秦丽.“投资”定义与ICSID管辖权[J].宜宾,宜宾学院学报,2006(11)：8.
[32]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 164.
[33]Available at:http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-101-1997.pdf. as of 2009/7/30.
[34]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007, at 164.
[35]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3; IIC 102 (1998), (2002) 5 ICSID Rep 200; (1998) 37 ILM 1391; Vol ⅩⅩⅣa Yearbook Commercial Arbitration (AJ van den Berg ed.Kluwer Law Intl, The Hague 1999) 39 (excerpts),9 March 1998, available at: http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-102-1998.pdf
[36]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 21. Available at: http://www.investmentclaims.com/ViewPdf/ic/Awards/law-iic-101-1997.pdf.
[37]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 31-32.
[38]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 39-40.
[39]Fedax NV v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, para 43.
[40]Available at: http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=showDoc&docId=DC647_En& caseId=C229.
[41]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:48.
[42]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 41.
[43]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 53.
[44]Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11), Award on Jurisdiction, para 45.
[44]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 51.
[46]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. Ⅱ), UN publication,1999, at 54-55.
[47]《关于最惠国条款的公约(草案)》第四条,参见联合国网站：http://untreaty.un. org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft%20articles/1_3_1978.pdf.
[48]卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf, as of 2009/7/21.
[49]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.下划线为本文作者所加。
[50]"Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol.Ⅲ), at 4.
[51]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 138.
[52]For a review of efforts to establish an MAI, see Riyaz Dattu, Essay, A Journey from Havana to Paris:The Fifty-Year Quest for the Elusive Multilateral Agreement on Investment,24 Fordham Int'l L.J.275 (2000). Cited from supra note.
[53]see Richard Snyder, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause:An Analysis with Particular Reference to Recent Treaty Practice and Tariffs 211-22 (1948), at 197,199-205. Cited form supra note.
[54]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004). available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[55]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 138.
[56]Maffezini v. Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision on Jurisdiction,5 ICSID (W. Bank) 396 (2000),
available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/emilio DecisiononJurisdiction.pdf.
[57]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2007:190-191.
[58]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2007:191.
[59]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final award on merits and damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580.
[60]Case summary of Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org。
[61]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 54.
[62]Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 54.
1631 Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Sri Lanka, Final Award on Merits and Damages, ICSID Case No ARB/87/3; IIC 18 (1990); 4 ICSID Rep 246; 30 ILM 580, para 56.
[64]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:190.
[65]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J.INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 156.
1661 Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000)
[67]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 9-10.
[68]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：41.
[69]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 14.
[70]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 15.
[71]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 23.
[72]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000). at 21.
[73]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21.
[74]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 20-21.
[75]Ibid, at 21.
[76]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21. [77]Ibid, at 25.
[78]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008, at 185; Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 157.
[79]Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INTL L.125,130 (2007), at 158.
[80]Gabriel Egli, Don't Get Bit:Addressing ICSID's Inconsistent Application Of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses To Dispute Resolution Provisions, Pepperidge Law Review2007, at 1067.
[81]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：42.
[82]《维也纳条约法公约》第31条,见1http://www.un.org/chinese/law/ilc/treaty.htm.
[83]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008, at 185.
[84]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/siemens-decision-en.pdf.
[85]Case summary of Siemens A.G. v The Argentine Republic by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org.
[86]Case summary of Siemens A.G. v The Argentine Republic by S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL,2008), available at http://www.biicl.org.
[87]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:194.
[88]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 82..
[89]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 81.
[90]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 85-86.
[91]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004). para 95-96.
[92]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 97-99.
[93]Siemens A G. v Argentina ICSID Case No. ARR/02/8 Decision on Jurisdictinn (2004),para 101
[94]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 102.
1951 Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/salini-decision.pdf
[96]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 23-25.
[97]Case summary of Salini Costruttori S.p.A. and Italstrade S.p.A.-v-The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13) by John P. Gaffney, available at http://www.oflynnexhams.ie/news_publications/Salini%20Case%20Summary.pdf.
1981 Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 27.
[99]Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008.
[100]Dana H. Freyer and David Herlihy Most-Favored-Nation Treatment and DisputeSettlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How "Favored" is "Most-Favored"?, ICSID REVIEW—FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL, at 72.
[101]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 66.
[102]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 66.
[103]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 102.
[104]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004),para 118-119.
[105]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004),para 106.
[106]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004), para 108.
[107]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004), para 109-116.
[108]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.573 (2004), para 114-115.
[109]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.5 (2004),117-118.
[110]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[111]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 19-20.
[112]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 21.
[113]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 26.
[114]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005),para 26.
[115]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 79.
[116]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 189.
[117]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 192.
[118]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 193.
[119]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 196.
[120]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction.44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 195.
[121]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para214.
[122]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 213.
[123]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 215.
[124]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 218.
[125]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 221.
[126]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 240.
[127]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,
2008,
[128]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 1.
[129]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para2-3.
[130]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 4.
[131]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 8-9.
[132]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[133]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[134]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160.
[135]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160..
[136]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 162.
[137]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 163.
[138]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 165.
[139]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8, 2008,para 160,para 197.
[140]See Camuzzi v. Argentina. ICSID Case No. ARB/03/2.
[141]See Gas Natural SDG S. A. v. Areentian. ICSID Case No. ARB/03/10.
[142]See Tecnicas Medioambientales Teemed, S. A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case N
[143]See Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S. A.& InterAguas Servicios Integrales del Agua S. A. v. Argentina, ICSID CaseNo. ARB/03/17.
[144]See National Grid plc v. The Argentine Republic,Decision On J urisdiction dated 20 J une 2006,ad hoc arbit ration under UNCITRAL Rules.
[145]See Vivendi Universal v. Argentine Republic,ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3.
[146]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)：42.
[147]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:203-204.
[1]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:34.
[2]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275Also see http://www.ustr.eov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf. as of 2009/7/21.
[3]Article 10 of European Energy Charter Treaty, from The Energy Charter Treaty and Related Documents by Energy Charter Secretariat, available at: http://www.encharter.org/fileadmin/user_upload/document/EN.pdf#page=211
[4]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343, as of 2009/10/17.
[5]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[6]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[7]资料来源,商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/h/h.html。2009/7/22访问.
[8]资料来源,国家商务部网站,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xieyi.shtml,2009/10/17访问.
[9]蔺志军.双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D]:北京,中国政法大学,2006:29.
[10]Treaty Concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, Thail.-F.R.G., art.3(2), June 24,2002,avialble at http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/germany_thailand.pdf.
[11]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[12]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 189.
[13]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/siemens-decision-en.pdf.
[14]Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004), para 106.
[15]Rudolf Dolzer & Margrete Stevens, Bilateral Investment Treaties 65 (1995). Cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 146.
[16]Jean-Pierre Laviec, Protection et Promotion des Investissements:Etude de Droit International Economique 9 (1985), cited from Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125,130 (2007), at 146.
[17]Preston M. Torbert, Globalizing Legal Drafting:What the Chinese can Teach Us about Ejusdem Generis and All That, Scribes Journal of Legal Writing,2007, p44-45.
[8]赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996:26.
[19]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 27.
[20]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.l (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 28.
[21]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004,p11.
[22]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 29.
[23]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 29.
[24]Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its thirtieth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/SER.A/1978/Add.1 (Part 2) ("ILC Report") UN document A/33/10, at 30.
[25]Marie-France Houde, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law, OECD Working Paper No.2004/2,2004, p9.
1261 Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000)
[27]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 9-10.
[28]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 15.
[29]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 17.
[30]United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards,1963, p.109,110, cited from above note, at 18.
[31]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 21.
[32]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), available at http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/plama-decision.pdf.
[33]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 19-20.
[34]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 21.
[35]Plama Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction,44 I.L.M.721 (2005), para 36.
[36]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008.
[37]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 18.2.
[38]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 18.3.
[39]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 172.
[40]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 174-175.
[41]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 179.
[42]Salini Costruttori S.p.A. and Italstrade S.p.A. v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13), Decision on Jurisdiction of November 29,2004.
[43]Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24), Decision on Jurisdiction of February 8,2005.
[44]Telenor v. Hungary, Award of September 13,2006, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/15.
[45]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 197.
[46]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343.
[47]李萍.NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[M].北京：中国政法大学,2003:54.
[48]陈安.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:187.
[49]陈安.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资协定的新实践[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007:187.
[50]Most-Favored-Nation Treatment, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements,UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10(Vol.Ⅲ)., UN,1999, at 7.
[51]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,2001：106.
[52]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,2001:107-112.
[53]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006.
[54]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 178.
[55]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award. Apr.21,2006, para 178.
[56]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004. Award, Apr.21,2006, para 181.
[57]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 4 of Separate Opinion by Weiler.
[58]Berschader v. Russia, SCC Case No.080/2004, Award, Apr.21,2006, para 19 of Separate Opinion by Weiler.
[59]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007.
[60]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 126.
[61]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 128.
[62]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 130.
[63]Roslnvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005. Award on Jurisdiction.Oct.2007, para 135.
[64]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008.
[65]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 159.3.
[66]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 160.
[67]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 162.
[68]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 163.
[69]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 166.
[70]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 167.
[71]Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 162.
[72]Emilio Agustion Maffezini v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction (Jan.25,2000), at 14.
[1]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004),at 5, available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[2]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004),at 5, available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/37/33773085.pdf, as of 2009/8/4.
[3]资料来源,商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/av/200212/20021200058403.html,2009/12/9访问.
[4]李萍.NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2003:54.
[5]Article 1108 of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at
http://www.sice.oas.ore/trade/nafta/chap-111.asp#A1108. as of 2009/12/16. [6] Annex Ⅳ of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/anx4cda.asp#Annex_Ⅳ, as of 2009/12/16.
[7]Annex Ⅲ of North American Free Trade Agreement, available at http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/anx3mex.asp#Annex Ⅲ, as of 2009/12/17.
[8]OECD Working Papers on International Investment No 2004/2, "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004), at 7.
[9]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:308.
[10]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：8-9.
[11]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：287.
[12]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[13]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：296.
[14]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:296-297.
[15]吉顺平.WTO不同领域最惠国待遇的比较研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:48.
[16]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京： 法律出版社,2000:288.
[17]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:300.
[18]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:295.
[19]对对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:298.
[20]在GATT中有些条款是明文作为最惠国规则的例外的,如地20条(一般例外)、第21条(安全例外)、暗示含有最惠国例外的则有第24条(关税联盟)、第12条(国际收支失衡的数量限制)；在程序上允许引用作出例外处理的,有地25条第5款(免除义务)、第33条(按议定条件加入)和第35条(一国得不同意对加入国适用总协定)。引自赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,1996:66.
[21]区域一休化例外也是GATT例外中最突出、最困难的问题。GATT第24条规定了关税同盟和自由贸易区及其与两者有关的临时安排。该条款为各种优惠协议留下了一个极大的漏洞。因此,GATT对于关税同盟、自由贸易区的例外规定了若干重要限制。...乌拉圭回合的成果包含了一项“GATT1994第24条的解释谅解书”。谈判代表们希望达成该谅解书,以解决上述有些问题。...非常重要的是,该谅解书还规定,涉及到与关税同盟、自由贸易区或临时安排有关的第24条问题,可援用GATT 1994的争端解决条款。引自约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦.大学出版社,2001:185-187.
[22]See:Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General, The Future of the WTO 21-23 (Dec.2004), available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto e/10anniv e/10anniv e.htm.
[23]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995).
[24]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 5.
[25]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 7-8.
[26]薛林.论GATT第24条对RTAs十区域经济一体化的规范[J],广西政法十部管理学院学报,2006(4)：111-112.
[27]Agreements that have been submitted for review by GATT Working Parties and by the Committee are listed in Annexes to this document. See also WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, Mapping of Regional Trade Agreements, WT/REG/W/41 (Oct.11,2000), available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm.
[28]John H. Jackson, (2002) The Jurisprudence of GATT&the WTO—Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations,Higher education Press, p107.
[29]从GATT到WTO共有三个案件涉及GATT第24条,分别是1996年的土耳其案、1996年墨西哥海关估价案和1998年阿根廷鞋类保障措施案,其中最重要的是土耳其案。
[30]See http://rtais.wto.org/UI/publicsummarytable.aspx,as of 2009/10/5.
[31]闫鸿鹂.双边FTA与WTO的关系研究[J],贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),2007(6):27.
[32]参见United Nations Centreon Transnational Corporation:《BilateralInvestmentTreaties}) Published in 1988 by Graham & Trotman Limited, P187、195;转引自牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000：95.
[33]资料来源：商务部中国自由贸易区服务网,http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand_xieyi.shtml.2009/12/18访问。
[34]Cf. ADF Group, Inc. v. United States, Final Award, Jan.9,2003, Para 76-87,104-07,6 ICSID Rep.470 (W. Bank 2003).
[35]Cf. ADF Group, Inc. v. United States, Final Award, Jan.9,2003, Para 76-87,104-07,6 ICSID Rep.470 (W. Bank 2003), para 196.
[36]该条约因为只有十年的有效期,加上捷克和斯洛伐克在1992年的分裂,所以应该已经失效。而中国与捷克共和国在2005年签订的新的双边投资保护协定中该条款已经有了一些变化,该协定第三条第7款规定：本条中的最惠国待遇条款不得适用于为便利小规模边境贸易而获得的优惠。资料来源：商务部条法司网站,http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058392.html,2009/12/19访问。
[37]参见赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996:15.
[38]范剑虹.国际投资法导读[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2000:330.
[39]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:96.
[40]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p523.
[41]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p523.
[42]See CMS Gas Transm. Co. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, Award, May 12,2005, para.377 (W. Bank 2005).
[43]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p522.
[44]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007.
[45]RosInvest Co U.K. v. Russia, SCC Case No. Arb.V079/2005, Award on Jurisdiction,Oct.2007, para 135.
[46]本文在第二章中通过对国际投资协定的分析,除了双边税收协定中一股没有最惠国条款外,其他所有类型的双边和多边投资协定中都包含了最惠国条款,包括经合组织的MAI草案。
[47]正因为最惠国条款在表述(wording)上的差异,所以造成对最惠国条款的不同理解。在Wintershall公司诉阿根廷案中,仲裁庭引用了联合国秘书长在其1949年的《备忘录》中的一句话：“对于最惠国条款的不同解释在当时造成了很多困难,即使现在,情况也还是这样。”(Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, December 8,2008, para 177)
[48]在胡盛涛所写的《寻求投资开放与国家安全的新平衡—美国境内外资并购中的国家安全审查制度及其对中国立法的借鉴》一文中,作者认为：在迪拜港口并购案中,美国当局关于港口所有权从一个外资公司转移到另外一个外资公司并不形成安全隐患,甚至还有利于加强安全控制的结论是正确的。但是,在公众的压力下,众多国会议员坚持认为把美国港口交给阿联酋公司经营将威胁国际安全,从而推翻了美国外国投资委员会允许并购的决定。该文引自陈安主编《国际经济法学刊》第14卷第1期(2007),北京大学出版社,2007年第一版,第31页。
[49]See Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco(Fr. V. U.S.),1952 I.C.J.176,192(Aug.27).
[50]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000:33.
[51]例如,外资给阿根廷带来了20世纪90年代中期的繁荣。阿根廷曾一度被西方发达国家誉为“拉丁美洲自由化改革的明星”,然而到21世纪初,阿根廷却不得不面对一场严重的经济危机。2001年12月,阿根廷政府宣布无力偿还1410亿美元的国家债务。2001年11月30日,阿根廷爆发大规模的银行挤兑潮,政府被迫采取紧急措施包括限制居民银行提款和资金流出境外。为了应对危机,阿根廷政府又通过了一系列法令,试图减轻危机的影响。然而这些措施的实行,同时给那些曾积极参与阿根廷私有化进程的外资带来不利影响。因此,自2001年美国CMS公司在ICSID提起针对阿根廷的第一起仲裁申请以来,共有30多家投资于阿根廷公用事业领域的外商在ICSID提起了针对阿根廷的仲裁申请。截止到2006年11月11日,在ICSID103件未决案中就有36件以阿根廷为被告,竞占到所有未决案件的34%。被告如此集中于一国并导致“群起而攻之”的现象,不但在《ICSID公约》及其仲裁体制诞生四十年来所从未见过,而且即使在近现代整个国际仲裁制度的发展史上,也可谓空前未有!且这些仲裁申请要求贴偿的数额巨大,例如仅CMS要求赔偿的数额就达2.66亿美元。如果这些案件悉数败诉的话,阿根廷将面临一连串数额惊人的赔偿。阿根廷刚刚复苏的经济将面临一场更为严峻的考验。引自刘京莲.阿根廷经济危机后的“国际投资法律危机”研究——兼及对中国的借鉴意义[J],太平洋学报,2006(6)：19.也请参见江时学.阿根廷危机的来龙去脉[J],国际经济评论,2002(Z1)：36-38.
[52]Stephen W. Schill, Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009, p567.
[1]刘笋.国际投资保护的国家法制—若干重要法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2002:347.
[2]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[3]GATT 1994,第一条,参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:424.
[4]GATS,第五条,参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[Ml.北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[5]根据《建立WTO协定》第10条第2款,对GATS第二条第一款的修订,只有当所有成员均接受后才能生效,这意味着,最惠国待遇条款作为GATS的重要规定,对其修订需要取得所有成员的一致同意。参见石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:60.
[6]根据GATS第1条第2款,“服务贸易”为(a)自领十一成员领土向任何其他成员领土提供服务；(b)在一成员领土内向任何其他成员的服务消费者提供服务；(c)一成员的服务提供者通过在任何其他成员领土内的商业存在提供服务；(d)一成员的服务提供者通过在任何其他成员领土内的自然人存在提供服务;
[7]GATS第28条中的注12规定：如该服务不是由法人直接提供,而是通过分支机构或代表处等其他形式的商业存在提供,则该服务提供者(即该法人)仍应通过该商业存在被给予在本协定项下给予服务提供者的待遇。此类待遇应扩大至提供该服务的存在方式,但不需扩大至该服务提供者位于提供服务的领十以外的任何其他部分。
[8]余劲松.中国涉外经济法律问题新探[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1999:7.
[9]张若思.不难理解的难题—WTO新一轮服务贸易谈判中的人员跨界流动[J].国际贸易,2003(4):42.
1101 See Yi Wang, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment under the General Agreement on Trade in Services and its Application in Financial Services, Journal of World Trade, Vol.30, No.1,1994, at 99.
[11]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:287.
[12]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[13]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本 [M].北京：法律出版社,2000:296.
[14]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:288.
[15]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本
[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:295.
[16]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本
[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：298.
[17]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:65-66.
[18]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:66-67.
1191 Preview of the Panel Report, WT/DS27/R/USA, http://docsonline.wto.org/, as of 2010/7/20.
[20]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.274.
[21]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.275.
[22]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.304.
[23]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA, para 7.299.
[24]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 300.
[25]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 301.
[26]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 302.
[27]Panel report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/R/USA,para 303.
[28]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R, para 229.
[29]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R, para 231.
[30]Appellate report of European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, WT/DS27/AB/R,para 234.
[31]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R,para 2.19-29.
[32]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R,para 1.2-1.6.
[33]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.236.
[34]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.237.
[35]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.237.
[36]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.253.
[37]Panel report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, para 10.254.
[38]Appellate report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, para 174.
[39]Appellate report of Canada-Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, para 182.
[40]石静霞.WIO服务贸易法专论[M].北京：法律出版社,2006:94.
[41]See http://rtais.wto.org/UI/publicsummarytable.aspx, as of 2009/10/5.
[42]On the current multilateral negotiations under the aegis of the WTO known as the Doha Round, see, Frances Williams & Guy de Jonquieres, Top WTO Nations Hail Deal on Doha, Financial Times, Aug.2,2004, at 1.
[43]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[44]See:Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General, The Future of the WTO 21-23 (Dec.2004), available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/10anniv_e/10anniv_e.htm。
[45]赵维田.世界贸易组织的法律制度[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,2000:75.
[46]GATS,第二条,]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:289.
[47]TRIPs,第四条,]参见对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译.世界贸易组织乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[M].北京：法律出版社,2000:323.
[48]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995).
[49]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995). at 5.
[50]See WTO Secretariat, Regionalism and the World Trading System 11-12 (1995), at 7-8
[51]薛林.论GATT第24条对RTAs十区域经济一体化的规范[J].广西政法十部管理学院学报,2006(4):111-112.
[52]Agreements that have been submitted for review by GATT Working Parties and by the Committee are listed in Annexes to this document. See also WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, Mapping of Regional Trade Agreements, WT/REG/W/41 (Oct.11,2000), available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm.
[53]刘瑛.关贸总协定第24条解读-规则、案例和展望[J].国际贸易问题,2006(2):110.
[54]John H. Jackson, (2002) The Jurisprudence of GATT&the WTO—Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations,Higher education Press, p107.
[55]曾令良.区域贸易协定的最新趋势及其对多哈发展议程的负面影响[J].法学研究,2004(5):127.
[56]Sydney M. Cone, Ⅲ, The promotion of free-trade areas viewed in terms of most-favored-nation treatment and "imperial preference", Michigan Journal of International Law Winter 2005, p581.
[57]闫鸿鹂.双边FTA1与WTO的关系研究[J].贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),2007(6)：27.
[58]《中国-新加坡自由贸易协定》第一条。资料来源：http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/
[59]《中国-新加坡自由贸易协定》第一百六十一条第二、三款规定：“二、各方重申对《TRIPS协定及双方参加的与知识产权相关的其他多边协定的承诺。三、为本章之日的,《TRIPS协定》经必要修改后并入本协定,构成本协定的一部分。资料来源同上。
[60]关于NAFTA的文本,笔者参考的文本来自http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/naftatce.asp。
[61]《中国-巴基斯坦自由贸易协定》,资料来源：http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/。
[62]傅明、张讷：《论〈北美自由贸易协定〉之分散型争端解决机制》,载陈安.国际经济法学刊.第13卷第2期[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:309.
[63]高永富.中国参与制定区域贸易协定争端解决机制初探》[J].世界经济研究,2008(7):58.
[64]两个分协定是指《北美环境合作协定》(NAAEC)和《北美劳T合作协定》(NAALC)两个协定。参见高永富.中国参与制定区域贸易协定争端解决机制初探》[J].世界经济研究,2008(7):58.
[65]史晓丽.区域贸易协定争端解决机制中的“场所选择条款”探析[J].政法论坛,2008(2):110.
[66]如中国—新西兰FTA第一条,NAFTA第一条等。
[1]资料来源：1991年至2007年国家统计局全国年度统计公报的相关数据,http://www. stats.gov.cn/tjgb,转引自巫云仙.改革开放以来我国引进和利用外资政策的历史演进[J].中共党史研究,2009(7)：30-32.
[2]资料来源：国家商务部网站：http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/v/v.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[3]资料来源：国家商务部网站http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/201002/20100206785656.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[4]资料来源：国家商务部网站http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tongjiziliao/v/201006/20100606976053.html,2010年7月11日访问.
[5]梁咏.中国投资者海外投资法律保障制度研究[D].上海：复旦大学,2009:11-12.
[6]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20090225 102490.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[7]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/iwtztj/t20090722 108774.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[8]资料来源,商务部网站,http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/wztj/jwtztj/t20090722 108774.htm,2010/1/10访问.
[9]卢勇进、余劲松、齐春生.国际投资协定与协定新论[M].上海：人民出版社,2007:99.
[10]数据来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/column/2010.shtml,2010/7/12.
[11]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[12]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[13]Cai Congyan, China—Us BIT Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,461-462.
[14]中华人民共和国商务部条法司,《中华人民共和国政府和德意志联邦共和国政府关于鼓励和相互保护投资协定》,资料来源：http://tfs.mofcom. gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html.
[15]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058418.html,2010/7/17.
[16]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058415.html,2010/7/17.
[17]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200212/20021200058407.html,2010/7/17.
[18]资料来源：商务部网站http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/200212/20021200058344.html,2010/7/17.
[19]资料来源：商务部中国自由贸易区服务网http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/newzealand/newzealand xievi.shtml,2010/7/17.
[20]资料来源：商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/aw/201002/20100206778962.html,2010/7/17.
[21]Cai Congyan, China—Us Bit Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,475/.
[22]阿根廷在2001年爆发金融危机,政府宣布无力偿还近千亿美元的外债。阿政府在2005年进行大规模债务重组,但是仍然有部分态度强硬的债权人拒绝接受重组方案。他们采取各种司法手段向阿政府施加压力,包括向美国联邦法院起诉阿根廷政府,要求按照原先的契约偿还债务。同时,自2001年美国CMS公司在ICSID提起针对阿根廷的第一起仲裁申请以米,共有30多家投资于阿根廷公用事业领域的外商在ICSID提起了针对阿根廷的仲裁申请。截止到2006年11月11日,在ICSID103件未决案中就有36件以阿根廷为被告,竟占到所有未决案件的34%。被告如此集中于一国并导致“群起而攻之”的现象,不但在《ICSID公约》及其仲裁体制诞生四十年来所从未见过,而且即使在近现代整个国际仲裁制度的发展史上,也可谓空前未有!且这些仲裁申请要求赔偿的数额巨大,例如仅CMS要求赔偿的数额就达2.66亿美元。如果这些案件悉数败诉的话,阿根廷将面临一连串数额惊人的赔偿。
[23]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/200212/20021200058349.html,2010/7/27.
[24]Scope and Definition, UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11 (vol. II), UN publication,1999, at 51.
[25]Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements (2008-June 2009), IIA MONITOR No.3 (2009)International Investment Agreements, UNCTAD/WEB/DIAE/IA/2009/8, at 10.
[26]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京人学出版社,2006:110.
[27]一些多边条约尤其是区域性条约本身包含了对仲裁的同意,比如NAFTA第1122条规定“各成员方根据本协议规定同意将争议提交仲裁”,第1120条进一步规定“投资者可以将争议提交ICSID或ICSID附加便利仲裁,或根据UNICITRAL规则进行仲裁。”能源宪章条约(Energy Charter Treaty)第26条3款a项规定
“各成员国无条件同意将争议付诸国际仲裁解决。”根据ECT的规定,投资者可以将争端提交ICSID或ICSID附加便利仲裁,根据UNICITRAL规则进行仲裁,或提交斯德哥尔摩商事仲裁院进行仲裁。参见湛茜.论ICSID仲裁中当事方的“同意”[J].北京仲裁,2010(1):81-85.[28]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:110.
[29]崔彦坤.中国缔结双边投资协定的新发展——从新旧中德双边投资保护与促进协定的比较的视角分析[J].法制与社会,2007,(3)：706.
[30]魏艳茹.论我国晚近全盘接受ICSID仲裁管辖权之欠妥[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:110.
[31]王海浪.“落后”还是“超前”—论中国对ICSID管辖权的同意[A].见陈安.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第1期(2006)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006:164.
[32]但这些条约并未引起学者的关注,中德条约之所以引起国内外法学理论界河实务界的特别关注,主要是：一方面,德国是新型双边投资协定的首创国,缔约理论和实践丰富,另一方面,中德条约是典型的发达国家与发展中国家间的条约,且德国在中国有大量累积投资,这使中德双边投资协定具有较强的现实意义,
不致像有些条约那样仅仅成为两国政治友好的一种象征而无相应的投资可供保护。参见崔彦坤.中国缔结双边投资协定的新发展——从新旧中德双边投资保护与促进协定的比较的视角分析[J].法制与社会,2007,(3)：706.
[33]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/at/201002/20100206778924.html,2010/7/27。
[34][34]资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/bk/200212/20021200058357.html,2010/7/27。
1351 Cai Congyan, China—Us Bit Negotiations And The Future Of Investment Treaty Regime:A Grand Bilateral Bargain With Multilateral Implications, Journal of International Economic Law June,2009,487/.
[36]参见新华网：http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2007-12/14/content 7248016,htm,2010/7/28.
[37]参见美国驻中国大使馆网站：http://chinese.usembassy-china.org.cn/062008sed4.html,2010/7/28.
[38]潘锐,娄亚萍.中美双边投资保护协定谈判的演进与发展[J].国际观察,2010,(1):64.
[39]参见人民网：http://world.people.com.cn/GB/11694519.html,2010/7/28.
[40]马鑫.中美投资谈判较劲国民待遇,难规避美国外资审查[J].国家财经周刊,2010年6月21日,转引自新浪网：http://finance.sina.com.cn/j/20100621/16508148817.shtml,2010/7/29.
[41]See:http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=343,2010/7/29.
[42]参见卢进勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资协定与协定新论[M].北京：人民出版社,2007:270-275.Alsosee http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/U.S.%20model%20BIT.pdf, as of 2009/7/21.
[43]资料来源,国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200405/20040500218063.html,2010/7/29.
[44]马鑫.中美投资谈判较劲国民待遇,难规避美国外资审查[J].国家财经周刊,2010年6月21日,转引自新浪网：http://finance.sina.com.cn/i/20100621/16508148817.shtml,2010/7/29访问。
[45]田丰.中美双边投资协定最中国的影响—基于美国双边投资协定范本(2004)的分析[J].当代亚太,2010(3)：84.
[46]如中国和芬兰BIT中第三条投资待遇规定：“缔约一方给予缔约另一方投资者投资的待遇,根据投资者的选择,应是本条第二款和第三款规定的待遇中更优惠的待遇”。资料来源：国家商务部条法司网站：http://tfs.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/h/au/200504/20050400033864.html,2010/7/29.
[1]王毅.论最惠国条款适用中的同类规则[J].国际贸易问题,1988:6-7.
[2]徐曾沧、李华.论“资本控制说”在国际投资法中的新应用[J].国际贸易问题,1998(3)
[3]姚梅镇.国际投资中的法律保护[J].国际法年刊,1982.
[4]王暄.国家对自然资源的永久主权[J].中国国际法年刊,1982.
[5]余劲松.论国际投资法的新近发展[J].法学评论,1997(6).
[6]邹立刚.多边投资担保机构公约评析[J].中国国际法年,1992.
[7]李华.浅析GATS中的最惠国待遇[J].法制与经济(下半月),2007(7)
[8]黄婷GATS最惠国待遇的经济分析[J].法制与社会,2008(10)
[9]钟祥喜.两难中的WT0最惠国待遇原则[J].法制与社会,2008(7)
[10]何光群.国际投资协定中最惠国待遇条款的适用比较[J].贵州财经学院学报,2007(6).
[11]姚静.试论区域贸易安排与WTO最惠国待遇原则之关系[J].法制与社会,2007(3).
[12]李良才.经济全球化背景下最惠国待遇条款的新发展[J].湖南财经高等专科学校学报,2007(1)
[13]徐崇利.从实体到程序：最惠国待遇适用范围之争[J].法商研究,2007(2)
[14]李兰花GATT1994最惠国待遇原则适用辨析——以我国的第一例被中诉案为例[J].石家庄学院学报,2007年(1)
[15]金卫星.中美关系史上围绕最惠国待遇问题的三次缔约谈判[J].江海学刊,2006(4).
[16]龙英锋.WTO协定中的国内税最惠国待遇探疑[J].税务研究,2005(9).
[17]孙君健.克林顿总统时期美国对华政策形成的特点一以总统、国会在对华贸易最惠国待遇问题上的争论为例[J].史学月刊,2005(6).
[18]高心湛. “最惠国待遇”的源流及其他[J].历史教学,2005(2)
[19]李燕妙.《服务贸易总协定》中的最惠国待遇原则[J].中山大学研究生学刊,2004(2).
[20]褚晓琳.从加拿大影响汽车产业措施案析最惠国待遇原则的适用[J].山西省政法管理干部学院学报,2004(2).
[21]白丹桂.投资协议中的最惠国待遇[J].科技创业月刊,2004(4).
[22]张卫华.试析最惠国待遇原则及国民待遇原则在《SPS协定》中的适用[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2003(5).
[23]白艳GATS最惠国待遇制度探微[J].社会科学研究,2003(3).
[24]唐慧俊.关于最惠国待遇的公平性问题[J].理论探索,2003(6).
[25]宋晓.论双边投资条约对国际投资法的发展：中国视角[J].江苏行政学院学报,2005(6):96—100.
[26]魏卿,姜立文.双边投资协定的经济分析[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2005,45(2):28—33.
[27]沈慧骅.国家和私人间投资争端解决机制的冲突和协调—兼比较WTO与ICSID争端解决机制的冲突与协调[J].当代法学,2003(11):107—112·
[28]颜晓晖,刘旭友.中国一东盟相互直接投资政治风险的法律防范体系构建[J].云南财经大学学报,2(X)7(8):7—12.
[29]高建明.论中国投资者在东盟的投资保障[J].贵州瞥官职业学院学报,2007(5):85—86.
[30]白萌.禁止履行要求的出现及对我国国际投资发展的意义[J].理论探索,2004(5):72—73,76.
[31]顾微微,张异和.多边投资条约下的外国投资准入自由化研究[J].政法学刊,2006(3):76—81.
[32]肖军.对海外投资的外交保护一国际法院关于迪亚洛案(初步反对意见)的判决评析[J].武大国际法评论,2008(2):338—350.
[33]李俊义.《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》与中国之应对[J].法治论丛,2008(5):63-一石7.
[34]孔小霞.海外中国国民权益保护的国际法思考[J].兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2008(6):95一-99.
[35]孔小霞.论外交保护制度的发展—兼评《外交保护条款草案》[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008(4):137-139.
[36]肖爱华.国家豁免主体的特殊问题研究—解读2004年《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》中国国有企业法律地位问题[J].法制与社会,2008(6):9—10.
[37]黄涧秋.论外交保护制度中的公司国籍规则—2004年联合国国际法委员会《外交保护条款草案》述评[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2007(11):85—89·
[38]杨卫东,郭堃.论投资者功能性国籍冲突及其解决—基于中外双边投资保护协定的分析[J].华北电力大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4):67—72.
[39]黄涧秋.论外交保护中的用尽当地救济规则—兼评2006年联合国《外交保护条款草案》[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2008(5):43—46.
[40]熊志银.关于我国海外投资保障制度的若干问题[J].东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2(Ⅹ)4(3)：15—18.
[41]余劲松《TRIMS协议》研究[J].法学评论,2001(2):97—103.
[42]刘笋.补贴与国际投资的关系及与国际立法趋势的冲突[J].法律科学,2003(2):94—103.
[43]余劲松,梁丹妮.公平公正待遇的最新发展动向及我国的对策[J].法学家,2007(6):151—156.
[44]余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究—由NAFTA的实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005(6):41—48.
[45]向玉兰.“BIT条款”和“协议条款”对ICSID管辖权的影响[J].法学杂志,2006(1):127—129.
[46]刘志云.略论经济主权与中外双边投资条约[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2000(1):45—49.
[47]沈四宝,伏军.构建我国境外投资促进立法的若干思考[J].法学家,2006(4):121—127.
[48]谢舟.未来中国“海外投资者”法律定义之考量[J].绍兴文理学院学报,2005,25(3):48—50,54.
[49]徐曾沧,李华.论“资本控制说”在国际投资法中的新应用[J].国际商务研究,1998(2):55—60.
[1]周鲤生.国际法.[M].北京：北京商务印书馆,1981.
[2]王铁崖.国际法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1995.
[3]邓正来.王铁崖文选.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[4]朱奇武.中国国际法的理论与实践.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[5]梁淑英.国际公法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[6]柳炳华著.国际法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[7]周忠海.国际经济关系中的法律问题.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993.
[8]姚梅镇.国际经济法概论.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1989.
[9]高树异.国际经济法总论.[M].吉林：吉林大学出版社,1989.
[10]张月蛟.国际经贸法律评析与运用.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1997.
[11]王传丽.国际贸易法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1995.
[12]韩德培.国际私法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1983.
[13]钱弊.国际私法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.
[14]刘振江.国际私法.[M].兰州：兰州大学出版社,1988.
[15]姚梅镇.国际投资法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1994.
[16]姚梅镇.比较外资法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1993.
[17]姚梅镇.海外投资法律实务.[M].北京：法律出版社,1993.
[18]姚梅镇.外商投资企业法教程.[M].北京：法律出版社,1994.
[19]沈四宝.国际投资法.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1990.
[20]王贵国.国际投资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1990.
[21]余劲松.国际投资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1994.
[22]徐崇利、林忠.中国外资法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[23]刘丰名.股份公司与合资企业法.[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[24]陈安.美国对海外投资的法律保护及其典型案例分析.[M].北京：鹭江出版社,1985.
[25]于安.外商投资特许权项目协议(BOT)与行政合同法.[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.
[26]江前良.国际BOT方式理论与实务.[M].北京：中国对外经济贸易出版社,1996.
[27]赵维田.最惠国与多边贸易体制.[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996.
[28]薛荣久.世界贸易组织与中国大经贸发展.[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,1997.
[29]滕维藻.走向国际市场一战后世界经济三大支柱.[M].贵州：贵州人民出版社1997.
[30]汪尧田.走向国际市场一世界贸易组织惯例与中国涉外经贸.[M].贵州：贵州人民出版社,1997.
[31]汪尧田,周汉民.世界贸易组织总论.[M].上海：上海远东出版社,1995.
[32]曾令良.世界贸易组织法.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,1999.
[33]任泉著.GATT乌拉卡回合内幕.[M].北京：世界知识出版社,1996.
[34]李东阳.当代西方国际投资学.[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社,1994.
[35]马野青,张二震.国际贸易学.[M].南京：南京大学出版社,1998.
[36]王新奎.国际贸易与国际投资中的利益分配.[M].上海：上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1995.
[37]国际经济贸易规范研究课题组编.国际经济贸易规则、惯例通编.[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社,1993.
[38]陈安,刘智中.国际经济法资料选编.[M].北京：法律出版社,1991年版.
[39]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.
[40]李光文,杨柱才.国际经贸、政治、军事事务规则公约大全.[M].南宁:广西民族出版社,1994.
[41]国际经济贸易规范研究课题组.国际经济贸易规则惯例通编—乌拉圭回合专辑.[M].北京：新华出版社,1995.
[42]陈安,蔡从燕.国际投资法的新发展与中国双边投资条约的新实践.[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2007.
[43]卢劲勇,余劲松,齐春生.国际投资条约与协定新论.[M].北京：人民出版社,2007.
[44]石静霞.WTO服务贸易法专论.[M].北京：法律出版社,2006年版.
[45]梁丹妮.<北美自由贸易协定>投资争端仲裁机制研究.[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.
[46]邵沙平.国际法院新近案例研究.[M].北京：商务印书馆,2006.
[47]刘笋.国际投资保护的国际法制—若干重要法律问题研究.[M].北京：法律出版社,2002.
[48]张庆麟.国际投资法问题专论.[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2007.
[49]叶兴平.国际争端解决机制的最新发展—北美自由贸易区的法律与实践.[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.
[50]李贵英.国际投资法专论—国际投资争端之解决.[M].北京：元照出版公司,2004.
[51]〔美〕约翰.H.杰克逊著,张乃根译.世界贸易体制一国际经济关系的法律与政策[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001.
[1]黎辉.多边投资担保机构公约与中国[A].见：黄炳坤.中国涉外经济法律问题[M].南宁:广西人民出版社,1991.
[1].联合国网站,网址Http://www.un.org
[2].中国与东盟自由贸易区网站,网址Http://www.cafta.com.cn
[3].经济合作与发展组织网站,网址Http://www.oecd.org
[4].中华人民共和国商务部网站,网址Http://www.moftec.gov.cn
[5].中华人民共和国国家税务总局网站,网址：Http://www.chinatax.gov.cn
[6].中国知网网站,网址：Http://www.cnki.net
[1]牛光军.国际投资待遇论[D].北京：中国政法大学,2000：
[2]李萍NAFTA国际投资法律问题研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2003:
[3]吉顺平.WTO不同领域最惠国待遇的比较研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:
[4]蔺志军. 双边投资保护协定中最惠国待遇研究[D].北京：中国政法大学,2006:
[5]褚晓琳.世界贸易组织(WTO)中的最惠国待遇研究[D].山东：山东大学,2005:
[6]韩悦GATS最惠国待遇条款法律分析[D].武汉：武汉大学,2004:
[7]薛锋. 论最惠国待遇原则[D].重庆：西南政法大学,2003:
[1]国家发展和改革委员会投资公司,国家发展和改革委员会投资研究所,国家统计局投资统计司.中国投资报告(2006)[R].北京：中国计划出版社,2006.
[2]联合国贸易和发展会议.竞争[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[3]联合国贸易和发展会议.国际合同[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[4]联合国贸易和发展会议.透明度[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[51联合国贸易和发展会议.鼓励措施[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[6]联合国贸易和发展会议.国际投资协议的关键术语和概念[R].纽约和日内瓦：联合国,2004.
[7]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2003年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2004.
[8]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2004年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2005.
[9]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局.2005年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,2006.
[10]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2006年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R].北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2007.
[11]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2007年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2008.
[12]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2008年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2009.
[13]中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局.2009年度中国对外直接投资统计公报[R]北京：中华人民共和国商务部,中华人民共和国国家统计局,国家外汇管理局,2010.
[1]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第9卷)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[2]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第10卷)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[3]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第1期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[4]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第2期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[6]陈安,李国安.国际经济法学刊(第12卷第4期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[7]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第2期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[8]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[9]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第13卷第4期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[10]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第14卷第1期)[G]北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[11]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第14卷第3期)[G].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
[12]陈安,蔡从燕.国际经济法学刊(第15卷第1期)IGI.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[1]. Sir Thomas Barclay, Effect Of "Most-Favored-Nation" Clause In Commercial Treaties, Yale Law Journal November,1907.
[2]. Stanley K. Hornbeck, The Most-Favored-Nation Clause (pt.1),3 Am. J. Int'l L.395, 395 (1909).
[3]. Endre Ustor, First Report on the Most-Favoured Nation Clause, [1969] 2 Y. B. Int'l L. Comm'n157,159, U. N. Doc. A/CN.4/213.
[4]. Stephen W. Schill, Multilateral zing Investment Treaties Through Most-Favored-Nation Clauses,27 Berkeley Journal of International Law,2009.
[5]. Scott Vesel, Clearing a Path through A Tangled Jurisprudence:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses and Dispute Settlement Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties,32 YALE J. INT'L L.125, 130 (2007).
[6]. Yannick Radi, The Application of the Most-favored-nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties:Domesticating the'Trojan Horse', European Journal of International Law, September,2007.
[7]. William Thomas Worster, Conflicts Between United States Immigration Law And The General Agreement On Trade In Services:Most-Favored-Nation Obligation Texas International Law Journal Fall 2006.
[8]. Randall Green, Human Rights And Most-Favored-Nation Tariff Rates For Products From The People's Republic Of China, University of Puget Sound Law Review Spring,1994.
[9]. Marian Nash Leich, Diplomatic Privileges And Immunities (U. S. Digest, Ch.4, S2) Most-Favored-Nation Status, American Journal of International Law April,1983.
[10]. Kathryn E. Spier, "Tied To The Mast":Most-Favored-Nation Clauses In Settlement Contracts, Journal of Legal Studies January,2003.
[11]. Anthony J. Dennis, Most Favored Nation Contract Clauses Under The Antitrust Laws, University of Dayton Law Review Spring,1995.
[12]. Warren F. Schwartz, Alan O. Sykes, Toward A Positive Theory Of The Most Favored Nation Obligation And Its exceptions In The WTO/GATT System, International Review of Law and Economics March,1996
[13]. George W. Kofler, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment In Direct Taxation:Does EC Law Provide For Community MFN In Bilateral Double Taxation Treaties?, Houston Business and Tax Law Journal 2005.
[14]. Stirling Adams, Negotiating A Commercial "Most Favored Nation" Clause, International Law & Management Review Spring,2005.
[15]. Gabriel Egli, Don't Get Bit:Addressing ICSID's Inconsistent Application Of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses To Dispute Resolution Provisions, Pepperidge Law Review,2007.
[16]. Jarrod Wong, The Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Dispute Resolution Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy March,2008.
[17]. Sydney M. Cone, The Promotion Of Free-Trade Areas Viewed In Terms Of Most-Favored-Nation Treatment And "Imperial Preference", Michigan Journal of International Law Winter 2005.
[18]. Charles E. Reynolds, the Most Favored Nation Clause:The Ultimate Double Edged Sword, Defense Counsel Journal, January 2007.
[19]. Dolzer, Rudolf and Myers, Terry. "After Tecmed:Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Investment Protection Agreements",19 ICSID Review-FILJ 49 (2004).
[20]. Ehring, Lothar. "De Facto Discrimination in World Trade Law" 36 (5) Journal of World Trade 921. (2002)
[21]. Freyer, Dana H. and Herlihy, David. "Most-Favored Nation Treatment and Dispute Settlement in Investment Arbitration:Just How'Favored'is'Most-Favored'? 20 ICSID Review-FIJL 58(2005).
[1]Campbell Mclachlan QC,Laurence Shore, Mattew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration, Substantive Principles, Oxford University Press,2007.
[2]. Ralph H. Folsom, Michael W. Gordon, John A. Spanogle:International Trade and Investment (2th Edition), Law Press, Beijing,2004. (photocopy)
[1]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2003.
[2]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2004.
[3]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2005.
[4]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2006.
[5]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2007.
[6]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2008.
[7]UNCTAD. World Investment Report[R]. New York and Geneva:United Nations,2009.
[8]. Foreign Direct Investment and Performance Requirements:New Evidence from Selected Countries, United Nations, New York and Geneva,2003.
[9]. International Investment Arrangements:Trends and Emerging Issues (UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development), United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2005.
[10]. Investor-State Disputes Arising from Investment Treaties:A Review (UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development), United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2006.
[11]. Investment Policy Review—Egypt edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,1999.
[12]. Investment Policy Review—Uzbekistan edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,1999.
[13]. Investment Policy Review—Uganda edited by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva,2000.
[14]. Current Issues on Industry, Trade and Investment No.1 Edited by Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, New York, United Nations,2003.
[15]. OECD. "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment in International Investment Law" (2004). Working Papers on International Investment Number 2004/2.
[16]. UNCTAD. "Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment" (1999), UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements. UN doc. UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/10 (vol.Ⅲ).
[17]. Yanai, Akiko. "The Function of the MFN clause in the Global Trading System" (2002). Working Paper Series 01/02-No.3, APEC Study Center Institute of Developing Economies.
[18]. Maffezini v. Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/7, Decision on Jurisdiction, (2000).
[19]. Siemens A. G. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction (2004).
[20]. Salini Costruttori S. p. A v. Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction, (2004).
[21]. Palma Consortium v. Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, (2005).
[22]. Asian Agricultural Products v. Sri Lanka, ICSID Case No. ARB/87/3, Final Award, (1991).
[23]. Yaung Chi Oo Trading v. Myanmar, ASEAN Case No. ARB/01/1, Award, (2003).
[24]. Tecmed v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/00/2, Award, (2003).
[25]. Wintershall Aktiengesellschaft v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/14, Award, (2008).
[1]http://www.westlaw.com
[2]http://www.un.org
[3]http://:www.wto.org
[4]http://www.miga.com
[5]http://www.unctad.org
[6]http://www.icsid.org
[7]http://www.oecd.org
[8]http://www.worldbank.org
[9]http://www.investmentclaims.com