【摘要】：《能源憲章條約》（以下簡稱ECT）是第一個專門解決能源投資爭議的多邊條約，對維持國際能源市場的穩(wěn)定，保障能源安全，保護投資者的利益發(fā)揮著日益顯著的作用。ECT投資仲裁機制更是ECT的亮點之一。在國際能源投資爭端的解決方面，ECT投資仲裁機制功不可沒，出現了許多有影響力的案件。通過對ECT相關案例進行考察，可以了解相關案例的當事人、爭議事項、仲裁機構及仲裁結果等相關情況，還可總結這十年ECT投資仲裁機制適用的規(guī)律和特點，發(fā)現投資者與東道國之間常見的爭端事由。 ECT投資仲裁機制的適用可分為兩個部分，一是投資者選擇適用ECT投資仲裁機制之前需要考慮的一些因素；二是仲裁申請?zhí)峤缓�，也就是具體適用過程中仲裁機構要處理的一些問題。適用前考量的對象主要在ECT投資仲裁機制的程序方面，它主張盡可能和平解決爭端，并且不需窮盡當地救濟，投資者可以選擇爭端解決程序，而且締約國需無條件同意仲裁。但是這種“無條件同意”有一定的例外情況，因此投資者在選擇仲裁機制以及仲裁機構時不僅要考慮一些主客觀因素，還需注意無條件同意的例外情況。進入第二階段，仲裁機構受理仲裁申請后就需考慮案件是否符合管轄權的五個條件，是否符合ECT第17條對管轄權的特殊規(guī)定；若享有管轄權，適用ECT投資仲裁機制解決具體爭議時可以適用的法律也是有限的；而對于選擇暫時適用ECT的國家，，ECT在該國提出停止暫時適用前是完全生效的。 ECT投資仲裁機制具體適用的經驗告訴我們ECT傾向于保護投資者，限制國家的管轄權，除非雙方特別規(guī)定當地救濟優(yōu)先、重大安全例外或其他排他管轄規(guī)定，否則仲裁庭對投資者提交的仲裁申請享有全面管轄權。中國投資領域目前是以吸收外資為主，對外投資雖不斷地發(fā)展但仍有不足，國內經濟政策不太穩(wěn)定，且國內的投資爭端解決制度欠完善，而對國際層面的投資爭端解決機制的制定和適用方面都參與不足，所以現階段應以保護本國國家主權為主，守住四大“安全閥”，不宜馬上加入ECT。我國應盡力完善中國能源投資爭端解決機制，增強對國際投資爭端解決機制的影響力，培養(yǎng)國際仲裁方面的人才。
[Abstract]:The Energy Charter Treaty (hereinafter referred to as ECT) is the first multilateral treaty devoted to the resolution of disputes over energy investment. It is the first multilateral treaty to maintain the stability of the international energy market and safeguard energy security. The investment arbitration mechanism is one of the highlights of ECT. In the settlement of international energy investment disputes, ECT investment arbitration mechanism plays an important role, there are a lot of influential cases. Through investigating the relevant cases of ECT, we can understand the parties, disputes, arbitration institutions and arbitration results of the relevant cases, and sum up the applicable rules and characteristics of the ECT investment arbitration mechanism in the past ten years. Identify common causes of disputes between investors and host countries. The application of ECT investment arbitration mechanism can be divided into two parts: one is some factors investors need to consider before they choose to apply ECT investment arbitration mechanism; Second, after the submission of the arbitration application, that is, some issues to be dealt with by the arbitration institution in the process of specific application. The main subject of pre-application consideration is the procedure of the ECT Investment Arbitration Mechanism, which advocates the peaceful settlement of disputes as far as possible and does not require the exhaustion of local remedies, investors can choose dispute settlement procedures, and the parties need to agree to arbitration unconditionally. However, there are some exceptions to this kind of "unconditional consent", so investors should not only consider some subjective and objective factors when choosing arbitration mechanism and arbitration institution, but also pay attention to the exception of unconditional consent. In the second stage, when the arbitration institution accepts the arbitration application, it needs to consider whether the case meets the five conditions of jurisdiction and whether it meets the special provisions of article 17 of ECT on jurisdiction. In the case of jurisdiction, the applicable law of ECT investment arbitration mechanism is also limited, and for countries that choose to apply ECT provisionally, ECT is fully in force before it proposes to suspend provisional application in that country. The experience of the specific application of the ECT investment arbitration mechanism tells us that ECT prefers to protect investors and limit the jurisdiction of the State, unless the parties specifically specify local relief priorities, significant security exceptions or other exclusionary provisions. Otherwise, the arbitral tribunal shall have full jurisdiction over the arbitration application submitted by the investor. At present, China's investment field is dominated by the absorption of foreign capital, although foreign investment continues to develop but there are still shortcomings, domestic economic policies are not very stable, and the domestic investment dispute settlement system is not perfect. However, the establishment and application of the investment dispute settlement mechanism at the international level are insufficient, so at this stage we should focus on the protection of the sovereignty of our country and keep the four "safety valves", and it is not appropriate to join the ECT. immediately. China should try its best to perfect China's energy investment dispute settlement mechanism, strengthen its influence on international investment dispute settlement mechanism, and train talents in international arbitration.
【學位授予單位】：湘潭大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D997.4

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 陳安;;中外雙邊投資協(xié)定中的四大“安全閥”不宜貿然拆除——美、加型BITs談判范本關鍵性“爭端解決”條款剖析[J];國際經濟法學刊;2006年01期

2 蔡從燕;;不慎放權,如潮官司——阿根廷輕率對待投資爭端管轄權的慘痛教訓[J];國際經濟法學刊;2006年01期

3 林一飛;;雙邊投資協(xié)定的仲裁管轄權、最惠國待遇及保護傘條款問題[J];國際經濟法學刊;2006年01期

4 陳安;;區(qū)分兩類國家,實行差別互惠:再論ICSID體制賦予中國的四大“安全閥”不宜貿然全面拆除[J];國際經濟法學刊;2007年03期

5 陳輝萍;;ICSID仲裁庭擴大管轄權之實踐剖析——兼評“謝業(yè)深案”[J];國際經濟法學刊;2010年03期

6 李瑞民;;《能源憲章條約》與國際能源投資爭端解決[J];國際石油經濟;2008年08期

7 徐崇利;;國際投資條約中的“岔路口條款”:選擇“當地救濟”與“國際仲裁”權利之限度[J];國際經濟法學刊;2007年03期

8 曾加;王萍麗;;國際能源投資爭議的解決機制研究——以《能源憲章條約》為例[J];寧夏大學學報(人文社會科學版);2008年01期

9 張正怡;;晚近ICSID仲裁庭管轄權裁決的實證考察——兼談我國首次被申訴案件的管轄權抗辯[J];時代法學;2011年06期

10 余勁松;詹曉寧;;論投資者與東道國間爭端解決機制及其影響[J];中國法學;2005年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前3條

1 賈孟奇;《能源憲章條約》暫時適用條款分析及對我國的啟示[D];中國政法大學;2011年

2 黃汀;ECT中仲裁解決投資者—國家爭議的法律問題研究[D];湖南師范大學;2010年

3 王軼堅;《能源憲章條約》與WTO爭端解決機制管轄重疊問題研究[D];中國政法大學;2009年

本文編號：2455184