摘要
美国联邦最高法院对"BG公司诉阿根廷"案的审理及其裁决引发了关于国际投资仲裁裁决的司法审查是否应该有别于国际商事仲裁裁决司法审查的争论。国际投资仲裁裁决司法审查的"商事化"并不可取,因为国际投资条约中的投资者-东道国仲裁条款不同于商事仲裁协议,国际投资仲裁的价值取向不同于商事仲裁。对于我国来说,从宏观上要明确立场,即积极推动国际投资仲裁的"去商事化";从微观上,我国法院和缔约机关也要在司法和条约商签谈判中贯彻国际投资仲裁的"去商事化"并进行相应的应对。
The United States Supreme Court＇s Decision in＇BG Group v.Argentina＇Case triggered debates on the question whether judicial review of international investment arbitration award shall differ from that of international commercial arbitration award.The＇commercialization＇of judicial review of international investment arbitration award is not advisable,because investor-state arbitration clause in investment treaty shall not be considered as the same as a commercial arbitration agreement and the value-orientation of international investment arbitration is different from international commercial arbitration.From Chinese perspective,the Chinese government is recommended to take the position of promoting＇de-commercialization＇of international investment arbitration;the Chinese courts and treaty negotiators are recommended to implement＇de-commercialization＇of international investment arbitration during judicial activities and treaty negotiations.
出处
《法学评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2018年第3期152-162,共11页
Law Review
关键词
国际投资仲裁
仲裁裁决司法审查
国际投资仲裁的“商事化”
International Investment Arbitration
Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards
＂Commercialization＂ of Interna-tional Investment Arbitration
