【摘要】：在我國(guó)與周邊的俄羅斯、哈薩克斯坦、烏茲別克斯坦、土庫(kù)曼斯坦、緬甸開(kāi)展的能源管道合作中存有出現(xiàn)投資爭(zhēng)端的可能性。現(xiàn)有的《能源憲章條約》、我國(guó)參與的區(qū)域性條約、締結(jié)的涉外能源合作領(lǐng)域的雙邊條約和政府間協(xié)議卻不能適用于解決此類(lèi)投資爭(zhēng)端。但是我國(guó)與上述五國(guó)簽訂的雙邊投資保護(hù)協(xié)定中包含投資爭(zhēng)端解決的專(zhuān)門(mén)性規(guī)定,因此本文選擇從雙邊投資保護(hù)協(xié)定的角度探討該領(lǐng)域的投資爭(zhēng)端解決途徑。對(duì)于投資者母國(guó)與東道國(guó)之間的爭(zhēng)端,本文認(rèn)為通過(guò)政治或者外交途徑解決是首選。因?yàn)槲覈?guó)與這五國(guó)之間保持著良好的外交傳統(tǒng),并且也確實(shí)存有多方面、多層次的外交談判平臺(tái)。如果通過(guò)政治或者外交途徑不能解決此類(lèi)爭(zhēng)端,則可以嘗試通過(guò)國(guó)際仲裁的方式解決。對(duì)于我國(guó)投資者與東道國(guó)之間的投資爭(zhēng)端,本文建議選擇ICSID仲裁的途徑予以解決。雖然解決投資者與東道國(guó)之間的投資爭(zhēng)端的途徑很多,包括：通過(guò)友好協(xié)商解決、通過(guò)東道國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)行政或司法程序解決、通過(guò)設(shè)立個(gè)案仲裁庭解決等,但是通過(guò)ICSID解決更有利于最大限度的保護(hù)我國(guó)投資者的利益。通過(guò)ICSID仲裁的優(yōu)勢(shì)在于：ICSID框架內(nèi)嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)闹俨猛ソM成方式和成熟的仲裁程序規(guī)則可以為裁決的公正性提供強(qiáng)有力的保障；同時(shí),ICSID的裁決解釋、修改、撤銷(xiāo)程序可以將爭(zhēng)端方國(guó)內(nèi)法院在執(zhí)行ICSID裁決時(shí)的干預(yù)程度降至最低。若要將投資者與東道國(guó)之間的投資爭(zhēng)端提交ICSID仲裁,必須滿(mǎn)足ICSID管轄的三個(gè)必要條件：當(dāng)事方必須滿(mǎn)足一定的資質(zhì)；爭(zhēng)端必須具有投資性和法律性；當(dāng)事人之間必須存在書(shū)面的將爭(zhēng)端提交ICSID仲裁的協(xié)議。在中外能源管道領(lǐng)域,我國(guó)投資者與東道國(guó)之間的投資爭(zhēng)端是能夠滿(mǎn)足上述條件,可以適用ICSID進(jìn)行仲裁的。
[Abstract]:There is the possibility of investment disputes in China's cooperation with neighboring Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Myanmar on energy pipelines. The existing "Energy Charter Treaty", the regional treaties to which China is a party, bilateral treaties and intergovernmental agreements in the field of foreign energy cooperation cannot be applied to the settlement of such investment disputes. However, the bilateral investment protection agreements signed by China and the five countries mentioned above contain special provisions on the settlement of investment disputes. Therefore, this paper chooses to explore the approaches to the settlement of investment disputes in this field from the angle of bilateral investment protection agreements. For the disputes between home country and host country, this paper thinks that political or diplomatic solution is the first choice. Because China and these five countries maintain a good diplomatic tradition, and indeed there are many, multi-level diplomatic negotiation platform. If such disputes cannot be resolved politically or diplomatically, an attempt can be made to settle them through international arbitration. For the investment dispute between the investor and the host country, this paper suggests that ICSID arbitration should be chosen to settle the dispute. Although there are many ways to resolve investment disputes between investors and host countries, including through friendly negotiations, through domestic administrative or judicial proceedings of the host country, and through the establishment of arbitration tribunals in individual cases, etc. However, the ICSID solution is more conducive to the maximum protection of the interests of Chinese investors. The advantages of ICSID arbitration lie in: the rigorous constitution of arbitration tribunal and the mature rules of arbitration procedure within the framework of ICSID can provide a strong guarantee for the fairness of the award; At the same time, ICSID's ruling explains that amending and setting aside procedures can minimise the intervention of domestic courts of disputing parties in enforcing the ICSID ruling. In order to submit the investment dispute between the investor and the host country to ICSID arbitration, three necessary conditions of ICSID jurisdiction must be satisfied: the parties must satisfy certain qualifications, the dispute must be investment and legal; There must be a written agreement between the parties to submit the dispute to ICSID arbitration. In the field of domestic and foreign energy pipeline, the investment dispute between Chinese investors and host country can meet the above conditions and can be applied to ICSID arbitration.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D996.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 千省利;朱明能;;論《中國(guó)能源投資條約》間接征收范圍界定——以國(guó)際判例的視角[J];今傳媒;2010年12期

2 李艷;;論國(guó)際商事仲裁的優(yōu)劣性及其完善途徑[J];重慶交通學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年04期

3 劉冰;;論完善中國(guó)——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制——以比較研究為視角[J];重慶工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年06期

4 孫永祥,張晶;中國(guó)和俄羅斯、中亞國(guó)家油氣合作現(xiàn)狀、問(wèn)題及對(duì)策[J];東歐中亞市場(chǎng)研究;2002年01期

5 彭岳;;國(guó)際投資中的間接征收及其認(rèn)定[J];復(fù)旦學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年02期

6 徐崇利;;“間接征收”之界分:東道國(guó)對(duì)外資管理的限度[J];福建法學(xué);2008年02期

7 楊澤偉;我國(guó)能源安全保障的法律問(wèn)題研究[J];法商研究;2005年04期

8 楊澤偉;;跨國(guó)能源管道運(yùn)輸?shù)臓?zhēng)議解決機(jī)制[J];法學(xué);2007年12期

9 周怡蕾;;試析東盟經(jīng)濟(jì)爭(zhēng)端的法律解決機(jī)制[J];廣東技術(shù)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年05期

10 徐振強(qiáng) ,江旭;國(guó)際石油合作項(xiàng)目中的政治風(fēng)險(xiǎn)及其管理[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作;2003年06期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 賈鐵軍;[N];光明日?qǐng)?bào);2007年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 劉聿;中國(guó)與中亞能源合作[D];南京師范大學(xué);2006年

2 邵言波;論中國(guó)與中亞能源合作[D];青島大學(xué);2009年

3 趙yN誠(chéng);上海合作組織框架下中國(guó)與中亞國(guó)家油氣能源合作機(jī)制研究[D];新疆大學(xué);2009年

4 艾柯;中哈能源合作中的法律問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2373115