论文部分内容阅读
为了解决投资仲裁正当性危机,欧盟利用欧美《TTIP协定》谈判的机会提出了欧盟模式的改革方案即建立投资法院机制。该机制不仅提高了程序透明度、加大了第三方和非争端缔约方参与程序的力度、选任了一批更具独立性的法官,而且首次采纳了一套系统的上诉机制,还对欧盟法问题进行了妥善安排。尽管投资法院机制对投资仲裁机制作出了种种完善,但它本身性质上属于司法还是仲裁依然未定,它所作裁决能否得到有效执行取决于它未来能否实现多边化。更为重要的是,进行深入分析后,它的存在可能依然与欧盟法律秩序的要求不符,这些未解和缺陷均可能成为这一欧盟模式为更多国家所接受的阻碍。
In order to solve the crisis of legitimacy of investment arbitration, the EU made use of the opportunity of the negotiation of the “TTIP Agreement” in Europe and the United States to propose a reform proposal of the EU model that is to establish an investment court mechanism. The mechanism not only increased procedural transparency, increased the participation of third-party and non-disputed parties in the process, selected a group of more independent judges, and for the first time adopted a system of appeals mechanisms that also provide for EU law issues Well arranged. Although the investment court mechanism has made various improvements to the investment arbitration mechanism, its nature of judicial or arbitration remains uncertain. Whether its decision can be effectively implemented depends on its ability to achieve multilateralization in the future. More importantly, after further analysis, its existence may still be inconsistent with the requirements of the EU legal order, and these unsolved and deficiencies may become obstacles that the EU model accepts for more countries.