国家豁免与“投资者—国家”仲裁裁决的执行

State Immunity and the Enforcement of Investor-State Arbitral Awards

本文首先介绍《ICSID公约》与《纽约公约》项下有关仲裁裁决执行的制度。尽管这两个公约的规定不尽相同,但当败诉一方拒绝履行裁决时,它们都为胜诉方提供了公约缔约国的国内法律救济途径。依照以上两个公约之规定,即使投资者在仲裁中胜诉,他们也可能在裁决的执行时遇到困难,因为有些资产会因为其被关于主权豁免的国内法所保护而无法被执行。本文试图阐明胜诉的投资者可能面临的两种困境:一是各国基于国家豁免而享受的保护;二是《纽约公约》与一国国家豁免法之间交互作用的复杂性。本文旨在论证舒勒(Schreuer)教授的先见之明——国家豁免永远是仲裁裁决的执行中的一个棘手问题。

This chapter begins by describing the regimes set forth for the enforcement of awardsunder the ICSID Convention and under the New York Convention.Though the routeseach prescribes are different,each refers the prevailing party in a dispute to themunicipal legal system(s) of State parties to the treaties in the event of a losing party’srefusal to pay an award.Successful investors in investment arbitrations governedby either regime can thus run into difficulties in attempts to recover assets that areprotected by municipal laws on sovereign immunity with respect to execution.Thechapter illustrates the pitfalls investors can face both because of the protectionsStates enjoy due to State immunity and the complexity of the interaction between theNew York Convention and municipal State immunity laws.It serves to demonstrateProfessor Schreuer’s prescience with respect to the perennially intractable nature ofState immunity with respect to enforcement.