国际投资仲裁裁决的救济类型分析——兼论非金钱性救济在国际投资仲裁裁决中的运用

通常而言，国际投资仲裁裁决的救济类型可以分为“金钱性救济”和“非金钱性救济”，“金钱性救济”往往表现为赔偿损失，而“非金钱性救济”在国际投资仲裁裁决中可以是要求败诉方履行某项行为。自国际投资仲裁机制建立以来，“金钱性救济”一直是主流救济方式，而“非金钱性救济”由于公约自身安排的缺陷鲜少运用。鉴于“救济”与“执行”的紧密相连性，本文在总结了国际投资仲裁裁决中涉及“非金钱性救济”案件的基础上，分析了《华盛顿公约》和《纽约公约》对执行非金钱性救济的态度问题，从而厘清本文的要旨：非金钱性救济不但具有可适用性，而且具有功能性，应当在未来的国际投资仲裁中得到更多的重视。

Generally speaking, the remedy types of international investment arbitration awards can be divided into ＂pecuniary remedy＂ and t, ~ ,, non-pecumary remedy . tary damages ＂Pecuniary remedy＂ , while ＂non-pecuniary remedy＂ usually refers to the mone- in the international invest- ment arbitration may be that the respondent shall be asked to fulfill certain deed. Since the inception of international investment arbitration mechanism, ＂pecuniary remedies＂ have always been the mainstream, while ＂non-pecuniary remedies＂ were rarely used due to the defects of the conventional arrangement. Considering the close relationship between ＂remedy＂ and ＂ enforcement＂, this article has, on the basis of concluding the cases in international investment arbitration concerning pe- cuniary remedies, analyzed the attitudes of ICSID Convention and New York Convention towards enforcing non-pecuniary remedies, and therefore clarifying the main point of this article： non-pecuniary remedy is not only applicable, but also functional, which shall receive more attention in fu- ture international investment arbitration.