国际投资条约中的“拒绝授惠”条款:适用争议及近期发展

国际投资条约中的＂拒绝授惠＂条款可有效抵御条约中宽泛的投资者定义带来的跨国投资者选择条约适用的行为。然而国际投资仲裁庭对该条款与仲裁庭管辖权的关系、东道国行使拒绝授惠权的方式、时间以及该条款是否具有溯及力等问题不一致的解释表明该条款的适用中还存在诸多争议,是一个仍然处于发展中的条款。近年来各国缔约时更愿通过明确、具体的条约文本来减少＂拒绝授惠＂条款适用的模糊性。我国海外投资的增加促使投资条约中的投资者的范围不断扩大,也使接受该条款变得必要。在接受该条款同时,也应使条款文本更加具体、明确。

The denial of benefits clause of international investment can counteract the foreign investor＇ treaty shopping effectively investor is not required with ＂substantial benefits ＂ in home stat treaty if the e. But the investment tribunal＇s inconsistent interpretations showed that it is still an under-developed clause. The recent practices of treaty make it clear that the contracting states are willing to reduce ambiguity of this clause by more certain and detailed text. Because of the increase of overseas investment and more broader investors covered in investment treaties, China could accept the denial of benefits clause with clear and certain language.