国际投资法中司法征收的逻辑证成及其推演张力

Logical Justification and Demonstration Effect of Judicial Expropriation in International Investment Arbitration

Saipem案投资仲裁庭将东道国法院拒绝承认与执行国际商事仲裁裁决的做法界定为司法征收,该案司法征收以国际商事仲裁裁决为BIT项下"投资"与无需穷尽当地救济为显著特征。司法征收的逻辑证成不仅拓展了征收的外延,而且有效区分了司法征收与司法拒绝,并对BIT下的"投资"概念作了进一步扩张解释。以司法征收为标志的Saipem案仲裁实践对国际投资法理论构成超越,具有明显的推演张力。中国应清醒认识到司法征收的双刃剑作用。

Saipem tribunal defines the host country court ’s refusal to recognize and enforce international commercial arbitration awards as judicial expropriation for the courts’ violating the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights in international law and the New York Convention.The notable features of the judicial expropriation in this case are that previous international commercial arbitration awards were treated as the "investment"under the BIT and exhausting local relief is not necessary.The logical justification of judicial expropriation not only expands the extension of expropriation,but also effectively distinguishes judicial expropriation and denial of justice.And it further expands the definition of"investment"under BIT.Marked by judicial expropriation,the arbitration practice of the Saipem case constitutes a transcendence to the theory of international investment law and has obvious demonstration effect.China should be soberly aware of the double-edged sword effect of judicial expropriation.