国际法庭秩序下恶意诉讼制度的主要规定

THE MAIN PROVISIONS OF THE MALICIOUS LITIGATION SYSTEM UNDER OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT

恶意诉讼在国内法中拥有相对完善的规制机制,但在国际法中的规制规则并不统一,适用上也存在较大的模糊性和不确定性。目前,国际法上的恶意诉讼主要体现在国际公法和投资仲裁法律规范之中。欧洲国际人权法庭提出了"四项"认定标准,联合国国际法院以"管辖权"问题规避对"恶意诉讼"的径直审查,《联合国海洋法公约》第294条虽然对恶意诉讼作出了规定,但国际海洋法法院至今还未援引此条进行仲裁。针对国际投资领域的恶意诉讼,《ICSID仲裁规则》41(5)条以"明显缺乏法律依据"作为驳回恶意诉讼的法定条件,生效至今适用了九次,积累了一套相对完整的认定规则,并在今后将其适用性进行拓展,探索非ICSID规则下运用"恶意诉讼"的规制机制。

Frivolous claim has a relatively complete set of regulatory mechanisms in the domestic legal system.However,there is no agreement on the rules for frivolous claim in the international law system,which leads to great ambiguity and uncertainty in actual application.For the time being,the regulation of frivolous claim in international law requires to be improved.The European Court of International Human Rights has put forward the four criteria to identify frivolous claim.The United Nations International Court of Justice often evades the direct review of frivolous claim by means of the jurisdiction issue.Although Article 294 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS)gives regulations on frivolous proceedings,the International Court on the Law of the Sea has not invoked this article so far.As for frivolous claims of international investment,Article 41(5)of the ICSID Arbitration Rules uses manifest lack of legal merits as the statutory condition for rejecting frivolous claim.This article has been invoked 9 times since its introduction and accumulated a relatively complete set of identification rules within ICSID arbitration.Its applicability may be expanded in the future,while the regulatory mechanism of frivolous claim under non-ICSID arbitration rules needs to be explored.