国际投资仲裁中国家反诉的仲裁同意问题

Investor's Consent to Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration

在投资仲裁庭确定对国家反诉的管辖权时,认定投资者对反诉作出的仲裁同意,不能仅仅以投资条约纳入ICSID或UNCITRAL仲裁规则为理由,而是必须依据条约自身的仲裁条款进行判定,特别是关于"争端"和适用法的规定。晚近仲裁实践和学者观点倾向于反对投资者单方面限缩仲裁同意范围的权利。司法经济的政策考量也有利于对国家反诉的管辖权认定。因此,如果国家希望确保其在投资仲裁中反诉的权利,应重点关注投资条约相关条款的设计。

In order to determine the jurisdiction of the investment arbitral tribunal to hear counterclaims by the respondent state, the reference to ICSID or UNCITRAL arbitration rules in investment treaties alone should not be construed as investor’s consent to counterclaims. Rather, a consent has to be based on the arbitration clauses in the investment treaties, in particular those concerning the 'disputes' and the applicable laws. Recent arbitral awards and scholars’ opinions tend to reject the right of investor claimant to unilaterally limit the scope of consent. Moreover, the policy considerations of judicial economy can help the affirmative determination of the jurisdiction over counterclaims. Therefore, if a state wants to ensure its rights of counterclaims, it should carefully design the treaty clauses.