国际投资仲裁下法律解释方法的误读和重构
Misinterpretation and Reconstruction of Legal Interpretation Methods under International Investment Arbitration
摘要: 国际投资仲裁实践中,仲裁庭随意解释、扩大解释、解释不一致或背离缔约国真实意图的情形极为常见。《维也纳条约法公约》第31条至33条作为习惯国际法条约解释的黄金法则,对仲裁庭条约解释权的引导至关重要。利用法律解释理论,对《维也纳条约法公约》第31条的重构,利用该公约引导与规范仲裁庭的条约解释权,强化文本解释的框架作用,将文本解释与目的解释相结合,正确理解嗣后解释与系统解释的辅助作用,引入演化解释法,以推动仲裁庭正确理解投资条约条款,作出准确、有效、合理的解释。
Abstract: In the practice of international investment arbitration, it is extremely common for arbitral tribunals to arbitrarily interpret, expand interpretation, interpret inconsist-ently or deviate from the true intent of the contracting parties. Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Con-vention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), as the golden rule of treaty interpretation in customary state law, are crucial in guiding the power of treaty interpretation of arbitral tribunals, using the theory of legal interpretation, the reconstruction of Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Trea-ties, the use of the Convention to guide and rule the treaty interpretation power of the arbitral tri-bunal, strengthen the framework role of textual interpretation, combine textual interpretation with purposive interpretation, correctly understand the auxiliary role of subsequent interpretation and systematic interpretation, and introduce the evolutionary interpretation method in order to pro-mote the arbitral tribunal to correctly understand the provisions of investment treaties and make accurate, effective and reasonable interpretation.
文章引用:周忻. 国际投资仲裁下法律解释方法的误读和重构[J]. 争议解决, 2023, 9(3): 778-786. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2023.93104

参考文献

[1] World Investment Report 2021. UNCTAD.
https://unctad.org/webflyer/world-investment-report-2021
[2] 余劲松. 国际投资条约仲裁中投资者与东道国权益保护平衡问题研究[J]. 中国法学, 2011(2): 132-143.
[3] International Investment Agreements Navigator-China. UNCTAD.
https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/countries/42/china/
[4] Alter, K.J. (2008) Agents or Trustees? International Courts in their Political Context. European Journal of International Relations, 14, 33-63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] 刘笋. 仲裁庭的条约解释权及《维也纳条约法公约》的引导与制约[J]. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2021(1): 139-156+196-197.
[6] Frank, S.D. (2005) The Legiti-macy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions. Fordham Law Review, 73, 1521-1625.
[7] Connolly, K. (2007) Say What You Mean: Improved Drafting Resources as a Means for Increasing the Consistency of Interpretation of Bilateral Investment Treaties. Vanderbilt Journal of Transna-tional Law, 40, 1579-1610.
[8] 鲁道夫∙多尔查, 克里斯托弗∙朔伊尔. 国际投资法原则[M]. 祁欢, 施进, 译. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2014: 26-34.
[9] 刘笋. 国际投资仲裁裁决的不一致性问题及其解决[J]. 法商研究, 2009(6): 139-142.
[10] 王虎华. 国际法渊源的定义[J]. 法学, 2017(1): 3-19.
[11] Reed, L. (2010) The De Facto Precedent Regime in Investment Arbitration: A Case for Proactive Case Management. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 25, 95-103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] SGS v. Philippines. ICSID Case No. AEB/02/6. Decision on Jurisdiction.
[13] 高鸿钧. 德沃金法律理论评析[J]. 清华法学, 2015(2): 97-138.
[14] 刘笋. 论国际投资仲裁中的先例援引及缔约国的干预和引导[J]. 法学评论, 2021, 39(3): 173-184.
[15] 刘笋. 论国际投资仲裁中的先例援引造法[J]. 政法论坛, 2020, 38(5): 64-78.
[16] 凌冰尧. 投资争端解决中的条约解释问题及完善[J]. 时代法学, 2021, 19(2): 107-116.
[17] 张乃根. ICSID仲裁的条约解释: 规则及其判理[J]. 经贸法律评论, 2018(1): 56-77.
[18] ILC (1966) Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with Commentaries. In: Yearbook of the Interna-tional Commission, A/CN.C/SER.A/1966, Vol. 2, United Nations, New York, 218-222.
[19] 姜曦, 魏晓旭. 条约的不当解释: 以条约解释主体为视角[J]. 社会科学战线, 2018(10): 263-267.
[20] 戴津伟. 法律解释方法的思维要素构造及其协调应用研究[J]. 法律方法, 2020, 32(3): 190-206.
[21] Ping an Life Insurance Company of China, Lim-ited and Ping an Insurance (Group) Company of China, Limited v. Belgium. ICSID Case No. ARB/12/29. Award.
[22] 韩燕煦. 论条约解释中的嗣后实践[J]. 国际法研究, 2014(1): 49-58.
[23] Bianchi, A. (2010) 4-Textual Interpretation and (International) Law Reading: The Myth of(in)Determinacy and the Genealogy of Meaning. In: Bekker, P., Dolzer, R. and Waibel, M., Eds., Making Transnational Law Work in the Global Economy: Essays in Honour of Detlev Vagts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 34-55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[24] 郑菲. 文义解释中的体系思维[M]. 《上海法学研究》集刊(2020年第17卷)——西北政法大学文集, 上海: 上海人民出版社, 2020: 23-28.
[25] (2013) The Rompetrol Group N.V. v. Romania. ICSID Case No. ARB/06/3, Award.
[26] 吴卡. 国际条约解释: 变量、方法与走向——《条约法公约》第31条第3款(c)项研究[J]. 比较法研究, 2015(5): 149-164.
[27] 中华人民共和国商务部. 中华人民共和国政府和刚果民主共和国政府关于促进和保护投资的协定[EB/OL].
http://images.mofcom.gov.cn/tfs/201910/20191031150608768.pdf, 2022-09-30.
[28] 吴卡. 条约演化解释方法的最新实践及其反思[J]. 法学家, 2012(1): 157-165+180.
[29] 韩逸畴. 时间流逝对条约解释的影响——论条约演变解释的兴起、适用及其限制[J]. 现代法学, 2015, 37(6): 140-153.