Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law

The article outlines a simple thesis: that international investmentarbitration – pursuant to regional and bilateral investmenttreaties – offers the clearest example of global administrativelaw, strictly construed, yet to have emerged. We present thisthesis by explicating four key features of investment treaties:they permit investor claims against the state without exhaustinglocal remedies; they allow claims for damages; they allow investorsto directly seek enforcement of awards before domestic courts;and they facilitate forum-shopping. Our argument is that, owingto this unique conjunction of features, the regulatory conductof states is, to an unusual extent, subject to control throughcompulsory international adjudication. Having highlighted thesefeatures, we then claim that investment arbitration is bestanalogized to domestic administrative law rather than to internationalcommercial arbitration, especially since investment arbitrationengages disputes arising from the exercise of public authorityby the state as opposed to private acts of the state. Further,we claim that the linkages between investment arbitration anddomestic legal systems are more direct and more closely integratedthan other forms of international adjudication in the publicsphere. For these reasons, we argue that the emerging regimeof investment arbitration is to be understood as constitutingan important and powerful manifestation of global administrativelaw.     

Soft Law in the European Union—The Changing Nature of EU Law

This article is based on the assumption that there is a continuum running from non‐legal positions to legally binding and judicially controlled commitments with, in between these two opposite types of norms, commitments that can be described as soft law. It aims at defining soft law in international relations in order to provide a mapping of EU law on the basis of the soft law/hard law divide. It helps categorise EU competences and public policies, and sees how they fit with the distinction between two kinds of processes: legalisation (transformation of non‐legal norms into soft or hard law) and delegalisation (transformation of hard law norms into soft law and evolution from hard to soft law).     

论国际投资条约仲裁的正当性缺失及其矫正

随着投资条约仲裁案件不断攀升,国际投资法以及投资条约仲裁凸显其重要性。但由于投资争议的特殊性、有关实体法的模糊或缺失、程序法的缺陷,出现了投资条约仲裁的正当性危机。实际上危机一说有夸张之嫌。经过制度化的改良,如通过增强仲裁程序透明度、允许法庭之友参与仲裁程序、合并审理、遵循先例、加强投资条约仲裁的公共功能等,投资条约仲裁制度的正当性缺失可在相当程度上得以矫正。同时,在国际投资实践中还应该细化投资条约的核心内容、限制管理国家风险、推动ADR和DPPs,以有效地防止争议发生和降低争议解决成本。     

Foreign Investors in the EU—Which ‘Best Treatment’? Interactions Between Bilateral Investment Treaties and EU Law

Abstract: This article discusses the main interactions between bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and EU law. The European Commission identified a number of incompatibilities in BITs signed by eight recent Member States with the USA, proposing solutions for their adjustment in conformity with EU law, but was this step sufficient? The risk of disputes remains, as long as the proposed adjustments do not achieve legal force and as long as other BITs still need to be harmonised with EU law. Moreover, provisions in BITs that are not in conflict with EU law could still be challenged if the application of certain EU requirements by Member States interferes with foreign investors' rights. To avoid such risks, coherence between different commitments and practices of the Member States is needed and coordination at the EU level is highly desirable.     

法律至上与国家治理

现代国家治理,是围绕法律而展开的多元主体公共参与的、以自由秩序为目的的治理。在国家治理中,虽不排除治理主体对法律之外的其他多元社会规范以及经由这些规范调整形成的多元社会秩序之依赖,但多元社会规范,是存在于法律调整射程内的;多元社会秩序,是统揽在法治秩序中的。因此,强调并坚持国家治理及其创新,就必须坚持法律至上的法治原则和宗旨。     

法律至上与和谐社会

法治是"中人"之治,它对社会秩序的维护和所体现的人文精神只是底线水平,与和谐社会所要求的"君子"道德水平和所体现的对人的终极关怀是有距离的.法律至上的法治并不必然导致和谐社会,但它对构建和谐社会具有积极的促进作用.     

Investment Treaty Law and the Fear for Sovereignty: Transnational Challenges and Solutions

This article addresses the vagueness, and the interpretative challenges associated with, international investment agreements (IIAs) and develops a new normative framework for interpreting these treaties. It focuses on the historical embedding of investment protection as a means of facilitating economic development as well as upon its synthetic public law nature. The analysis shows that a teleological approach to interpretation imposes boundaries on the meaning of substantive IIA provisions. The article then elaborates how the transnational dimension of IIAs provides a benchmark, which is the level of protection offered to economic actors against interference by the state in countries with the highest rule of law standards. The article then shows how the resulting challenges of comparative public law could be addressed through the methodology of re‐ and pre‐statement of transnational uniform ‘principles’: sophisticated and detailed rules striking the proper balance between private economic interests and the public regulatory interest, so as to provide more legal certainty for both investors and host states.     

Julien Fouret (Consulting Editor): Enforcement of Investment Treaty Arbitration Awards: A Global Guide

Liverpool Law Review -     

再论"法律至上"

中共十六大政治报告中,再次把依法治国,建立社会主义法治国家作为中国共产党人在新的历史时期治国的基本方针加以确认。依法治国的理念已深入人心。而要确立依法治国的治国理念,就必须树立起法律至上的观念,它是实现现代法治的观念基础,也是评价现代民主政治国家的基本准则。对于法律至上观念的理解,不仅要从法律自身来理解,而且要从社会关系的层次上,从人们的理性选择等角度进行深层次的考虑。正试图从现代法治的理性选择的角度论证这一问题。     

The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conflict: Constitutional Supremacy in Europe before and after the Constitutional Treaty

Abstract:  One of the core constitutional questions for national constitutional courts in the EU in the past decades has been whether to accept the claim made by the Court of Justice that EU law is the supreme law of the land, taking primacy even over conflicting national constitutional provisions. With the inclusion in the recently adopted Constitutional Treaty of a clause explicitly confirming the 'primacy of EU Law' appearances suggest that the EU is about to establish a characteristic of mature, vertically integrated, federal states such as the USA. This article argues that this view is mistaken. It develops a comprehensive jurisprudential framework for addressing constitutional conflicts, 'Constitutionalism Beyond the State' (CBC). CBS detaches the discussion of supremacy and constitutional conflict from a statist framework; provides a jurisprudential account that explains and justifies the highly differentiated, context-sensitive and dynamic set of conflict rules that national courts have in the past adopted; and provides the lacking theoretical basis for the more attractive, but undertheorised sui generis accounts of European constitutional practice that have recently gained ground in the literature. CBS provides a jurisprudentially grounded reconstructive account of why the issue of constitutional conflict is as rich and complicated in Europe as it is and why it is likely to remain so even if the Constitutional Treaty is ratified. The article then goes on to make concrete proposals addressed to national constitutional courts and the Court of Juctise respectively about how, in application of the developed approach, constitutional conflicts ought to be addressed doctrinally. It includes a proposal to read the new 'constitutional identity' clause as authorising Member States as a matter of EU Law to set aside EU Law on constitutional grounds under certain circumstances.     

论国际商事仲裁中瑕疵仲裁协议的法律适用

有效的仲裁协议是进行国际商事仲裁的基础,实践中瑕疵仲裁协议的出现是不可避免的。瑕疵仲裁协议的有效性取决于瑕疵仲裁协议所适用的法律。从瑕疵仲裁协议特点出发,瑕疵仲裁协议法律适用的方法具有特殊性。必须从其法律适用的角度一方面确定瑕疵仲裁协议的有效性,另一方面寻求完善和解决瑕疵仲裁协议问题的方法,最终减小因仲裁协议存在瑕疵给国际商事仲裁造成的阻碍。     

《欧盟宪法条约》对欧盟人权保护的影响

《欧盟宪法条约》的通过和生效将从根本上矫正欧盟经济、政治、军事和人权的不对称性,并使欧盟的人权保护从政治层面提升到司法层面。这一条约还从根本上弥补了欧盟的“人权赤字”,并使欧盟的人权保护制度与欧洲理事会的人权保护制度相连结,使欧盟的人权保护由点扩大到面。可以期待,随着条约的生效和施行,欧盟的人权保护将逐步处于区域性和全球性人权保护的领跑地位。     

国际投资仲裁的商事化与“去商事化”

近年以来,投资仲裁被认为面临着"正当性危机",这一局面在很大程度上是由于投资仲裁被商事化所导致的,这种商事化在一定程度上否定了国家的公法人法律人格,曲解了投资争端的法律性质。随着一系列争议仲裁裁决的出现,人们开始反思商事化的投资仲裁模式,逐步推动投资仲裁"去商事化"。然而,迄今为止的投资仲裁"去商事化"努力主要是程序性的,只有实体性的"去商事化"才能从根本上纠正投资仲裁存在的严重缺陷。     

国际投资仲裁中的社会利益保护

传统国际投资仲裁无论在程序安排还是价值取向上都倾向于偏袒外国私人投资者的经济利益,而对于东道国社会利益的保护则是缺乏的。由于东道国在推动经济与社会发展的同时,不仅仅考虑的是经济利益,也需要考虑某些社会利益或者社会价值的需求,因此在国际投资争端仲裁中,应当重视保护东道国的社会利益。在晚近的投资仲裁程序与实践中,保护东道国的社会公共利益的趋势在不断增强。     

Resolving Incompatibilities of Bilateral Investment Treaties of the EU Member States with the EC Treaty: Individual and Collective Options

Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) concluded by the EU Member States contain substantially similar clauses, including free movement of capital and investor‐to‐state dispute resolution. Article 307 EC provides for the primacy of pre‐accession treaties over the EC Treaty and simultaneously requires the Member States to eliminate their mutual incompatibilities. The European Court of Justice has declared that free movement of capital clauses of Austrian and Swedish pre‐accession extra‐EU BITs are incompatible with the EC Treaty as they will impede any restrictions on the movement of capital imposed as future Community legislation. A similar ‘free movement of capital’ clause is present in all extra‐EU BITs of the Member States, whether pre‐ or post‐accession. Article 307, however, does not apply to the post‐accession treaties which are equally capable of contriving the same consequences of impeding the application of the EC Treaty. In addition, the application of intra‐EU BITs provides investors from BIT party states access to the investor‐to‐state dispute resolution which is not available to investors from the Member States who do not have BITs with those Member States. This is discrimination and may distort the principle of equal treatment within the EU. Furthermore, the newly acceding EU States are facing extensive arbitral claims for carrying out the BIT‐EU conflicting obligations within their respective territories.     

仲裁协议有效性的法律适用

国际商事仲裁协议的契约性特点决定了它的准据法选择与普通合同的法律适用有相同之处,然而目前国际社会并不存在完全统一的认定仲裁协议有效性的标准,这给国际经济贸易纠纷的解决带来许多不便。我国在进行涉外仲裁时首先应当考虑适用当事人双方在仲裁协议中共同选择的法律,如无此选择,则应当适用与该仲裁协议有最密切联系的国家的法律来认定该协议的有效性。