本文選題：NAFTA + CAFTA�。� 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：2009年8月15日，中國(guó)——東盟投資協(xié)議的生效實(shí)施，首次將私人與國(guó)家間的投資爭(zhēng)端納入CAFTA解決范圍。投資者可以通過國(guó)際投資仲裁的方式直接起訴東道國(guó)請(qǐng)求賠償，這對(duì)東道國(guó)的國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)形成了極大的威脅和挑戰(zhàn)。而看似充滿危險(xiǎn)性和缺乏“正當(dāng)性”的投資仲裁機(jī)制卻在另一個(gè)區(qū)域貿(mào)易安排——北美自由貿(mào)易區(qū)中運(yùn)行了將近二十年。區(qū)域投資自由化的趨勢(shì)不可阻擋，區(qū)域投資爭(zhēng)端仲裁機(jī)制只會(huì)不斷地前進(jìn)而不會(huì)被廢除。因此，如何在保護(hù)投資者的合法權(quán)益以促進(jìn)區(qū)域投資的發(fā)展和維護(hù)東道國(guó)國(guó)家主權(quán)，避免遭遇濫訴這兩者之間找到平衡，是區(qū)域投資協(xié)議目標(biāo)實(shí)現(xiàn)的重要保障。本文嘗試從RTA投資爭(zhēng)端仲裁的相關(guān)具體法律問題入手，發(fā)現(xiàn)會(huì)影響到上述“平衡”的問題，同時(shí)借鑒NAFTA第11章理論和實(shí)踐中存在的優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)，對(duì)CAFTA投資仲裁制度的完善提出建議。 全文超過三萬字，除引言外，共有四個(gè)部分。 第一部分主要研究RTA投資爭(zhēng)端仲裁管轄權(quán)問題。分別從主體——投資者的國(guó)籍確認(rèn)、客體——投資的范圍以及引起爭(zhēng)端的國(guó)家“措施”的范圍和主觀——當(dāng)事雙方對(duì)仲裁的同意三個(gè)管轄權(quán)的構(gòu)成要件進(jìn)行分析，，并提出在CAFTA中嚴(yán)格適用投資者“國(guó)籍繼續(xù)原則”、縮小“投資”定義范圍、去除“措施”前“普遍適用”的限制以及借鑒、改進(jìn)NAFTA“棄權(quán)條款”的相關(guān)建議。 第二部分主要研究法律適用問題。通過對(duì)NAFTA和中國(guó)與東盟各國(guó)BITs中投資仲裁適用法律規(guī)定的評(píng)析，提出制定統(tǒng)一的CAFTA投資仲裁法律適用規(guī)則的建議。 第三部分研究投資仲裁的程序問題及透明度問題。首先通過對(duì)NAFTA投資仲裁程序的評(píng)析提出對(duì)CAFTA相關(guān)制度的完善建議。其次研究了RTA對(duì)于投資仲裁透明度的客觀需求和NAFTA的“法庭之友”制度的內(nèi)涵和不足。 第四部分主要研究執(zhí)行問題和監(jiān)督上訴問題。通過對(duì)CAFTA投資仲裁執(zhí)行制度的完善建議和RTA仲裁監(jiān)督機(jī)制的缺失的研究，提出了在RTA構(gòu)建仲裁上訴機(jī)制的構(gòu)想。
[Abstract]:On August 15, 2009, China-ASEAN Investment Agreement came into effect, and the investment disputes between private and state were brought into the scope of CAFTA for the first time. Investors can directly sue the host country for compensation through international investment arbitration, which poses a great threat and challenge to the host country's national economic sovereignty. Investment arbitration, which seems to be fraught with danger and lack of legitimacy, has been operating in another regional trade arrangement, the North American Free Trade area (NAFTA) for nearly two decades. The trend of regional investment liberalization is unstoppable, and the arbitration mechanism of regional investment disputes will not be abolished. Therefore, how to find a balance between protecting the legitimate rights and interests of investors, promoting the development of regional investment, safeguarding the national sovereignty of host countries and avoiding excessive litigation is an important guarantee for the realization of the objectives of regional investment agreements. This paper attempts to start with the specific legal issues related to RTA investment dispute arbitration, and finds that the above mentioned "balance" problems will be affected, and at the same time draw lessons from the advantages and disadvantages of NAFTA Chapter 11 in theory and practice. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the perfection of CAFTA investment arbitration system. The full text is more than 30,000 words, except for the introduction, there are four parts. The first part mainly studies the jurisdiction of RTA investment dispute arbitration. Analyzing the three constitutive elements of jurisdiction, respectively, from the nationality of the subject-investor, the scope of the object-investment and the scope of the "measures" of the State that gave rise to the dispute, and the consent of the parties to the arbitration. In addition, it is proposed to strictly apply the "nationality continuing principle" in CAFTA, narrow down the definition of "investment", remove the limitation of "universal application" before "measures", and draw lessons from it. The second part mainly studies the application of law. Based on the analysis of NAFTA and the applicable laws and regulations of investment arbitration in bits of China and ASEAN countries, the author puts forward some suggestions for establishing uniform applicable rules of CAFTA investment arbitration law. The third part studies the procedure and transparency of investment arbitration. First of all, through the analysis of NAFTA investment arbitration procedure, the paper puts forward some suggestions on the improvement of CAFTA related system. Secondly, it studies the objective demand of RTA for the transparency of investment arbitration and the connotation and deficiency of NAFTA's amicus curiae system. Based on the suggestions of CAFTA investment arbitration execution system and the lack of RTA arbitration supervision mechanism, this paper puts forward the idea of establishing arbitration appeal mechanism in RTA.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D997.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 季燁;;國(guó)際投資條約中投資定義的擴(kuò)張及其限度[J];北大法律評(píng)論;2011年01期

2 葉興平;《北美自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定》投資爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制剖析[J];法商研究;2002年05期

3 劉筍;;國(guó)際投資仲裁裁決的不一致性問題及其解決[J];法商研究;2009年06期

4 左海聰;中國(guó)國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)研究:世紀(jì)之交的回顧與展望[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年03期

5 郭玉軍,梅秋玲;仲裁的保密性問題研究[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2004年02期

6 康攀;;國(guó)際商事仲裁的管轄權(quán)問題探析[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年36期

7 詹曉寧,葛順奇;國(guó)際投資協(xié)定:“投資”和“投資者”的范圍與定義[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作;2003年01期

8 張智勇;;解析中國(guó)—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)《投資協(xié)議》[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

9 魏艷茹;;中國(guó)-東盟框架下國(guó)際投資法律環(huán)境的比較研究——以《中國(guó)-東盟投資協(xié)議》的簽訂與生效為背景[J];廣西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年01期

10 陸以全;;中國(guó)——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)投資爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制評(píng)析——以締約方與投資者間爭(zhēng)端解決為視角[J];西部法學(xué)評(píng)論;2011年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 宋蘋;BITs中的投資爭(zhēng)端管轄權(quán)相關(guān)法律問題[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

2 肖平;論自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定(FTAs)投資定義[D];廣東商學(xué)院;2011年

3 馬迅;《北美自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定》第十一章爭(zhēng)議解決機(jī)制研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2005年

4 張露;北美自由貿(mào)易區(qū)投資爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

本文編號(hào)：2007982