摘要
为了应对投资仲裁机制当前面临的正当性危机,国际社会从20世纪末便开始对投资仲裁上诉机制的构建进行探索。北京仲裁委员会/北京国际仲裁中心也在其最新发布的投资仲裁规则中设计了上诉机制。北仲采用的“选择性”上诉机制、上诉事由限于法律审和有限的事实审、对上诉程序的时限控制以及对不当程序拖延的上诉费用惩戒是其规则设计的亮点之处。但是北仲未能将上诉和初裁仲裁员的资质予以区分,且其所允许的兼职仲裁员制度可能产生利益冲突问题。中国未来对投资仲裁上诉机制进行设计时应该将上诉和初裁仲裁员的资质予以区分,且应采用全职仲裁员设计。与此同时,为了平衡投资仲裁上诉机制的公平和效率价值,中国一方面可以借鉴北仲的做法,另一方面也可以对挑战仲裁员程序加以明确的时间限制并排斥上诉仲裁庭发回重审权。
In order to cope with the current legitimacy crisis of investment arbitration mechanism,the international community has been exploring the construction of appellate mechanism for investment arbitration since the end of the 20th century.The BAC also designed an appellate mechanism in its latest investment arbitration rules.BAC’s choice of the“selective”appellate mechanism,the limitation of appeal grounds to legal trials and limited factual trials,the time control over appeal procedures and the punishment of appeal costs for improper delays in appeal procedures are the highlights of its rule design.However,the BAC fails to distinguish the qualification of the appellate arbitrators from that of the preliminary arbitrators,and the permitted part-time arbitrators may cause conflicts of interest.In China’s future design of appellate mechanism for investment arbitration,the qualifications of appellate arbitrators and preliminary arbitrators should be distinguished,and the design of full-time arbitrators should be adopted.In order to balance the fairness and efficiency value of the appellate mechanism for investment arbitration,China can learn from the BAC’s practice on the one hand,and on the other hand,it can also impose a clear time limit on procedures of challenging an arbitrator and deprive the appellate tribunal of the power to refer issues back.
出处
《北京仲裁》
2020年第4期177-195,共19页
Beijing Arbitration Quarterly
关键词
投资仲裁
正当性危机
上诉机制
investment arbitration
legitimacy crisis
appellate mechanism
