国际投资仲裁中危急情况的适用——以阿根廷所涉国际投资仲裁为例

Application of State of Necessity in InternationalInvestment Arbitration—Taking InternationalInvestment Arbitration Case InvolvingArgentina as An Example

晚近,在几起涉阿根廷的国际投资仲裁案件中,被申请方阿根廷均援引了《国家责任条款草案》中的危急情况规则和美国—阿根廷BIT中的紧急状态条款进行抗辩并主张免责,各案ICSID仲裁庭却对阿根廷的抗辩作出并不一致的裁决。本文从探究危急情况规则的来源入手,通过分析几起仲裁案件,指出危急情况规则和紧急状态条款在适用于国际投资仲裁时存在的问题。另外,本文针对如何完善中外双边投资协定中的相关规定提出了建议。

Recently,in several ICSID cases against Argentina,Argentina invoked state of necessity principle provided in Article 25 of ILC’s Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts as well as emergency clauses of the US-Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty(BIT)as defense and further claimed to be exempt from responsibility,while the tribunals reached contrasting conclusions.This article firstly probes into the source of the state of necessity principle,and further points out the problems existing in the process of interna-tionai investment arbitration when this principle and emergency clauses are applied after analyzing these cases.Based on China's specific situation,this article also makes some recommendations to improve relevant provisions of Sino-foreign BITs.