期刊文献+

TPP协定投资者-东道国争端解决机制评述 被引量:34

Review on the Mechanism of Investor-State Dispute Settlement under TPP Draft Agreement
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 本文在回顾跨太平洋战略经济伙伴协定(TPP)的由来和演进的基础上,重点剖析了TPP拟定中的投资者-东道国争端解决的条款。本文在结合中国双边投资协定的实践基础上,指出了中国应该尽早参与TPP的谈判,反映中国的利益诉求,以便协调中美双边投资协定谈判中的立场。 After reviewing the evolution of the transpacific partnership (TPP), this article focuses on the investor-state dispute settlement clauses under the draft TPP agreement. Compared to the Chinese practice on the BITS, this article suggests that China should participate as early as possible in the negotiation of the TPP agreement, in order to reflect the Chinese government’s interest, and thereby to coordinate the Chinese government position on the Sino-American BITs negotiation.
作者 龚柏华
出处 《世界贸易组织动态与研究(上海对外贸易学院学报)》 北大核心 2013年第1期59-67,共9页 Journal of Shanghai University of International Business and Economics
基金 上海市决策咨询研究课题"我国参与双边和多边投资规则制定和谈判的策略研究"阶段性成果
关键词 TPP 投资者-东道国 争端解决 仲裁 TPP investor-state dispute settlement arbitration
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献27

  • 1余劲松.外资的公平与公正待遇问题研究——由NAFTA的实践产生的几点思考[J].法商研究,2005,22(6):41-48. 被引量:40
  • 2LG&E Energy Corp. et al. v The Republic of Argentina. ICSID ease no. ARB/02/1 (2006) ;Continental Casualty Company v The Argentine Republic. ICSID case no. ARB/O3/gA, award of 5 September 2008.
  • 3See Anthea Roberts, Power and Persuasion in Investment Treaty Interpretation: The Dual Role of States, 104 Am. J. Int' l. L. 179 (2010).
  • 4See William W. Burke -White & Andreas yon Stadan, Investment Protection in Extraordinary Time: The Interpretation and Application of Nort - Precluded Measures Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties, 48 Va. J. Int' l L. (2008) 307, 376 - 81.
  • 5Id., 320-324,.
  • 6CMS Gas Transmission Company v The Argentine Republic, ICSID case no. ARB/01/08, 12) (annulment proceeding). Decision of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment of the Argentine Republic, 25 September 2007, para. 128 - 136.
  • 7Sempra Energy International v The Argentine Republic. ICSID case no. ARB/02/16 ( Annulment Proceeding), Decision on the Argentine Re- public' s Request for Annulment of the Award, 29 June 2010.
  • 8See Anne van Aakenand Jurgen Kurtz, Prudence or Discrimination? Emergency Measures, The Global Financial Crisis and International Economic Law, 12 J. Int' l Econ. L. 859 (2009).
  • 9SGS v. Pakistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/13, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction( August 6 2003 ) [ EB/OL]. Para. 166.
  • 10Id. , Para. 168.

同被引文献286

二级引证文献121

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部