BITs中的ICSID管轄條款研究
[Abstract]:An important subject in the field of international investment is the settlement mechanism of international investment disputes. This is not only an important topic on the level of international economic law, but also an important issue that has an important impact on the interests of investors, investor home countries and host countries in international investment practice. In order to solve this important issue, Accession to the Convention on the settlement of Investment disputes between States and Nationals of other States (hereinafter referred to as the "ICSID Convention"), the submission of disputes to the International Centre for the settlement of Investment disputes (hereinafter referred to as ICSID) has become the home country of more and more investors and The choice of the main body of international investment. On the other hand, with the growing acceptance of (Bilateral Investment Treaties, BITs) as an important basis for adjusting international investment relations, Many BITs also pay great attention to the dispute settlement mechanism between investor and host country. In view of the important international influence of ICSID in the international investment dispute settlement mechanism, many BITs have more or less made an agreement on the ICSID jurisdiction of investment dispute. As a member of ICSID Convention and an important practitioner of BITs, China also pays attention to the agreement on the jurisdiction clause of ICSID in the BITs signed with other countries. However, if the agreement of the ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs is improper, it is very likely that the then side will fall into a passive position in the dispute settlement mechanism. It is not difficult to see this problem from the existing international practice. This paper takes the jurisdiction of ICSID in BITs as the main research object, based on the case of international investment dispute arbitration, regards the relevant contents of BITs signed by our country as reference, and focuses on the agreement of ICSID jurisdiction in BITs between China and other countries. The purpose is to provide constructive advice for the practice of relevant international agreements in China. This paper is divided into four chapters. The main content and distribution are as follows: chapter 1: summary of ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs. This paper focuses on the basic contents of ICSID jurisdiction in BITs and the basic provisions of the ICSID Convention on central jurisdiction. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the basic background of ICSID jurisdiction. The second chapter is the trend that the domestic jurisdiction of host country gives way to ICSID. This part first pays attention to the practice of ICSID Convention and related international investment dispute settlement, analyzes the changing trend of the principle of exhaustion of local remedies in international investment arbitration, and concludes that the principle of exhaustion of local remedies is gradually desalinating; Secondly, focus on the legitimacy crisis in international investment arbitration, in order to highlight the adverse trend of resolving this kind of disputes through international arbitration; thirdly, pay attention to Argentina's ICSID arbitration crisis and countermeasures, perspective arbitration cases objectively explain the past, Highlight the seriousness and objectivity of the problem. Through the elaboration of the above three main problems, it shows that the domestic jurisdiction of the host country gives way to the unfavorable trend of ICSID, and highlights the importance of placing the right of international investment dispute settlement in the domestic jurisdiction of our country. The third chapter is about the practice and problems of the central jurisdiction clause in BITs of China. This part is concerned about the change of attitude about the ICSID jurisdiction agreement in the BITs signed by our country, and combined with the specific agreement of relevant BITs, focusing on the consent clause of ICSID jurisdiction, the principle of exhaustion of local remedies, the major security exception clause. Most-favoured-nation treatment clause, intuitively analyzes the possible risks in ICSID jurisdiction in China's BITs. The fourth chapter is about the suggestion of ICSID jurisdiction clause in BITs of our country. In view of the BITs, concluded between China and other countries, this paper puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the ICSID jurisdiction clause in China's BITs and the subsequent contracting practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】:中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】:碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】:2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】:D996.4
【相似文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 翁里,馬軍;WTO反傾銷(xiāo)協(xié)議法律適用的困惑——反傾銷(xiāo)協(xié)議第17.6(ii)條探微[J];上海市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年06期
2 龔柏華;張偉華;;美國(guó)就“中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)和執(zhí)行特定措施”與中國(guó)WTO磋商案評(píng)析[J];國(guó)際商務(wù)研究;2007年04期
3 王叔良;;簡(jiǎn)論關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定解決爭(zhēng)端的法律制度[J];政治與法律;1993年02期
4 韓龍;;論IMF與WTO在國(guó)際收支平衡問(wèn)題上的分工合作關(guān)系[J];江蘇行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年02期
5 李毅;;與中國(guó)有關(guān)的專(zhuān)屬經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)漁業(yè)爭(zhēng)端及其解決途徑之思考[J];東北亞論壇;2007年02期
6 王宏軍;;論印度外資法的體系及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題探索;2009年02期
7 趙婧;陳陽(yáng)軍;;關(guān)于南沙群島爭(zhēng)端解決的政策研究[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年02期
8 奚曉明;關(guān)于WTO規(guī)則中的非歧視原則在爭(zhēng)端解決中的具體運(yùn)用[J];法律適用;2001年S1期
9 王新;WTO爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制和下一輪談判的主要問(wèn)題及對(duì)策[J];律師世界;2002年02期
10 孫瑩;法制機(jī)制與國(guó)貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端的解決[J];中國(guó)對(duì)外貿(mào)易商務(wù)月刊;2003年02期
相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前10條
1 葉良;;關(guān)于我國(guó)農(nóng)產(chǎn)品貿(mào)易摩擦爭(zhēng)端的思考[A];第四屆農(nóng)業(yè)政策理論與實(shí)踐研討會(huì)——農(nóng)民專(zhuān)業(yè)合作組織發(fā)展與制度建設(shè)論文集[C];2007年
2 賀小勇;;論中美歐“稀有資源出口限制爭(zhēng)端”的法律問(wèn)題[A];《WTO法與中國(guó)論壇》文集——中國(guó)法學(xué)會(huì)世界貿(mào)易組織法研究會(huì)年會(huì)論文集(八)[C];2009年
3 張乃根;;試析WTO爭(zhēng)端解決履行機(jī)制[A];上海市社會(huì)科學(xué)界第五屆學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)文集(2007年度)(政治·法律·社會(huì)學(xué)科卷)[C];2007年
4 孫立文;;WTO貿(mào)易救濟(jì)爭(zhēng)端解決裁決執(zhí)行問(wèn)題分析[A];《WTO法與中國(guó)論壇》文集——中國(guó)法學(xué)會(huì)世界貿(mào)易組織法研究會(huì)年會(huì)論文集(八)[C];2009年
5 龔向前;;WTO食品安全爭(zhēng)端解決的“全球行政法”思路[A];WTO法與中國(guó)論叢(2011年卷)[C];2010年
6 孫立文;;淺析WTO爭(zhēng)端解決中國(guó)訴美輪胎特保措施案的法律意義[A];WTO法與中國(guó)論叢(2011年卷)[C];2010年
7 江必新;程琥;;論判例在WTO爭(zhēng)端解決中的適用[A];《WTO法與中國(guó)論壇》文集——中國(guó)法學(xué)會(huì)世界貿(mào)易組織法研究會(huì)年會(huì)論文集(八)[C];2009年
8 劉丹;;論WTO補(bǔ)貼爭(zhēng)端解決中的“反措施”[A];《WTO法與中國(guó)論壇》文集——中國(guó)法學(xué)會(huì)世界貿(mào)易組織法研究會(huì)年會(huì)論文集(八)[C];2009年
9 易波;李玉潔;;試論美國(guó)在WTO/DSM非違法之訴內(nèi)解決人民幣匯率爭(zhēng)端的不可行[A];WTO法與中國(guó)論叢(2011年卷)[C];2010年
10 胡仁鎖;;對(duì)《1972年國(guó)際海上避碰規(guī)則》條款的理解和修改意見(jiàn)[A];中國(guó)航海學(xué)會(huì)海洋船舶駕駛專(zhuān)業(yè)委員會(huì)論文集(1995—1997)[C];1995年
相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條
1 本報(bào)記者 汪秀芬;商務(wù)部:美“727條款”具有明顯歧視性[N];中國(guó)貿(mào)易報(bào);2009年
2 劉洪;“購(gòu)買(mǎi)美國(guó)貨”條款負(fù)作用發(fā)酵[N];中國(guó)改革報(bào);2009年
3 記者 李學(xué)江;加拿大抗議“購(gòu)買(mǎi)美國(guó)貨”條款[N];人民日?qǐng)?bào);2011年
4 馬修江 記者 謝平;鶴崗工商局整治“霸王條款”[N];黑龍江日?qǐng)?bào);2009年
5 ;美“買(mǎi)國(guó)貨”條款內(nèi)外招人煩[N];中國(guó)財(cái)經(jīng)報(bào);2009年
6 方莉 程志斌 劉克明;“瘋狂手機(jī)”狂發(fā)短信 退機(jī)遭遇“霸王條款”[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2009年
7 本報(bào)記者 黃凌鵬 實(shí)習(xí)生 程金園;霸王條款 利與法的博弈[N];甘肅法制報(bào);2009年
8 記者 饒潔 通訊員 熊漢東 深圳特區(qū)報(bào)評(píng)論員;網(wǎng)購(gòu)遭遇霸王條款有處講理[N];深圳特區(qū)報(bào);2010年
9 記者 洪敬譜;嚴(yán)打購(gòu)房合同中的霸王條款[N];中國(guó)消費(fèi)者報(bào);2010年
10 本報(bào)記者 常德偉;是“溫馨提示”還是“霸王條款”[N];朝陽(yáng)日?qǐng)?bào);2010年
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前10條
1 王永杰;WTO補(bǔ)貼爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2012年
2 蘇小勇;主權(quán)財(cái)富基金的法律規(guī)制研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年
3 歐馬;幾內(nèi)亞灣東海的海事?tīng)?zhēng)端解決[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年
4 溫融;應(yīng)對(duì)氣候變化政府間合作法律問(wèn)題研究[D];重慶大學(xué);2011年
5 房東;《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》(GATS)法律約束力研究[D];廈門(mén)大學(xué);2003年
6 肖又賢;WTO保障措施制度理論與爭(zhēng)端解決實(shí)踐研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2004年
7 鄭鵬基;網(wǎng)絡(luò)交易爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2005年
8 劉丹;海洋生物資源國(guó)際保護(hù)研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2011年
9 杜玉瓊;CEPA法律問(wèn)題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年
10 盧建祥;WTO裁決的強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行機(jī)制[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條
1 王立巖;BITs中的ICSID管轄條款研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年
2 岳s,
本文編號(hào):2253515
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/guojifa/2253515.html