评黑龙江国际经济技术合作公司等诉蒙古仲裁案——以投资条约中限缩式仲裁条款的解释为中心

A Case Analysis of Heilongjiang Internationa Economic & Technical Cooperative Corp. et al. v. Mongolia:Focusing on the Interpretation of Restrictive Arbitration Clause in Investment Treaties

黑龙江国际经济技术合作公司等诉蒙古仲裁案是中国投资者与＂一带一路＂沿线国政府解决投资条约争端的典型案件。负责审理本案的专设仲裁庭于2017年6月作出裁决,以双边投资条约中的仲裁条款仅适用于＂征收补偿款额争端＂为由拒绝行使管辖权。2017年9月,仲裁申请人向仲裁地法院提出申请撤销裁决的诉讼请求。基于美国所采取的限制豁免的立场,一国政府如签署仲裁条款,即放弃了在与仲裁有关的诉讼中主张豁免的权利,因此美国法院有权审理此案。根据美国法院处理同类案件的先例,如无特别约定,美国法院有权对可仲裁性问题重新审查,审查时应平衡考虑投资者与东道国的利益。

The case of Heilongjiang International Economic Technical Cooperative Corp. et al. v. Mongolia is one of the typical cases of investment disputes resolution between Chinese investors and the host states along ＂The Belt and Road Initiative＂.The ad hoc Tribunal of this case rendered the award in June 2017.Considering the arbitration clause in the China-Mongolia BIT only apply to disputes involving amount of compensation for expropriation,the Tribunal declined to exercise jurisdiction over the claimant＇s claims. In September 2017,the claimants filed a petition to annul the award in US courts. Based on the restrictive doctrine of state immunity which is adopted by US,when the government signed arbitration agreement,the state give up the defense of immunity during the legal proceedings arising from arbitration,so the US courts may adjudicate the case. According to the precedents which dealt with the similar issues in US courts,without particular agreement,US courts may review de novo the arbitrability on the basis of balancing protection of the interests of the investors and the host states.