“中国平安诉比利时王国投资仲裁案”——以条约适用的时际法为视角

An Analysis of China Ping An v.Kingdom of Belgium Investment Arbitration Case:from the Perspective of Inter-temporal Law in the Application of Treaties

"中国平安诉比利时案"的核心争议是条约适用的时际法问题。国际投资争端解决中心仲裁庭对该案的审理过程过于倚重形式法律推理与条约文本解释,未按照《维也纳条约法公约》第28条的要求充分考虑中国与比利时在缔结2009年双边投资协定时的立法意图。目前中国有大量双边投资协定处于"自动续期"状态,有待签订新约予以取代。在谈判新的双边投资协定时,中国应制定内容明确的过渡条款,或纳入专门的时际法适用条款。当某一投资争端涉及新旧双边投资协定的衔接问题时,中国投资者可考虑先寻求东道国当地救济,再适时诉诸国际仲裁。

The core issue of controversy in China Ping An v. Belgium case was the in- ter-temporal law in the application of treaties. In this case, the ICSID Arbitration Tribunal ex- cessively relied on the formal legal reasoning and textual interpretation of treaties to make its de- cision. Meanwhile, it failed to sufficiently consider, pursuant to Article 28 of the Vienna Con- vention on the Law of Treaties, the legislative intentions of China and Belgium when concluding the 2009 bit. Currently, there are a large number of bits between China and foreign countries which are in the state of automatic renewal and waiting for new agreements to replace them. When concluding new bits, China should formulate explicit transitional clauses or insert into them specific provisions on the application of inter-temporal law. In an investment dispute invol- ving the succession between old and new bits, China＇ s overseas investors may first seek local remedies in the host country and, failing that, resort to international arbitration at a proper moment.