نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار حقوق عمومی و بین الملل دانشگاه تهران

2 دکتری حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

3 دانشیار حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

در دعاوی سرمایه‌گذاری تکلیف اصلی داور بین­المللی بررسی این موضوع است که تعهد دولت میزبان سرمایه چه بوده و اینکه آیا این تعهد نقض شده است یا خیر. تکالیف دول میزبان معمولاً در عبارات و استانداردهای کلی بیان می­شوند و این امر انجام رسیدگی و تصمیم داوری جهت نتیجه‌گیری را مشکل میسازد. در این مسیر، روشی که داوری برای ارزیابی اقدامات دولت میزبان در بررسی نقض یا عدم نقض تعهد به کار می­گیرد تا حد بسیاری متأثر از روش­هایی است که در سایر دعاوی حقوقی به کار گرفته می‏شوند. این مقاله با رویکردی تحلیلی و توصیفی قصد دارد کارآمدی روش­های ارزیابی رفتار در سایر دعاوی حقوقی را موردتوجه قرار داده و کارایی آن‌ها را در استفاده در دعاوی سرمایه‌گذاری را ارزیابی نماید. با توجه به آنکه اقدام دولت میزبان به‌عنوان یک حاکمیت مستقل در برابر یک شخص خصوصی خارجی موضوع دعوی و تصمیم داوری بین­المللی است، مقاله حاضر در نتیجه‌گیری نهایی، نظام حقوقی سرمایه‌گذاری و داوری‌های مربوطه را دارای اقتضائاتی می‌شناسد که آن را نیازمند یک روش نظارتی خاص و با اعمال استانداردهای نظارتی مشخصی می­سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Standards of Review of the Host State’s Conduct in Investment Arbitration Law

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mehdi Piri Damgh 1
  • Mohammad Hossein Erfanmanesh 2
  • Seyed Mohammad Tabatabaei Nejad 3

1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Tehran, Tehran. Iran

2 PhD of Private Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran. Iran

3 Associate Professor, Privete Law, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

In cases regarding investment, the first duty of an arbitrator is to consider whether the action by a State hosting property of a foreign investor, is in breach of its international agreement-based obligations or not. The duties of the host state are usually broad in wording which makes it difficult for arbitrators to investigate and settle such cases. In this line, the approach that is taken to assess a breach of state's obligation with regards to the protection of foreign investors to a great extent is similar with the methods employed in other legal cases. The aim of this article is to examine and analyze the effectiveness of such methods in order to test their applicability in international investment arbitration. Since the measures taken by host state are considered as the administration of its sovereignty against a foreign investor and the decision of the international investment arbitration, this article concludes that the legal regime for international investment arbitration calls for particular elements that brings about a distinct regulating regime as well as the application of special standards of review.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • International Investment
  • Investment Arbitration
  • Standards of Review
  • Host State’s Conduct Public interest
-    حسیبی به آذین، «حداقل استانداردهای بین‌المللی و حمایت از سرمایه‌گذاران خارجی»، فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق عمومی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی سال سیزدهم، شماره 33، تابستان 1390، 43-78.
-    زمانی، سید قاسم و میرزاده، منیر السادات، «انتساب اعمال متخلفانه اشخاص خصوصی به دولت بر اساس معیار کنترل: رویه دیوان داوری دعاوی ایران – آمریکا» فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق عمومی دانشگاه تهران سال شانزدهم شماره 43 تابستان 1393، 81-108.
-    محبی، محسن، «رویه داوری بین‌المللی درباره غرامت (دعاوی نفتی)» مجله حقوقی، نشریه مرکز امور حقوقی بین‌المللی معاونت حقوقی و امور مجلس ریاست جمهوری شماره سی و پنجم 1385، 9-70.
نیکبخت، حمیدرضا و انصاری، نگین، «حفظ منافع اساسی دولت میزبان در توافقات سرمایه‌گذاری بین‌المللی»، مجله تحقیقات حقوقی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، شماره 56. زمستان 1390، 41-91.
-       Aguilar, William; Reisman, Michael, (2008) The Reasons Requirement in International Investment Arbitration: Critical Case Studies Guillermo, Leiden, BRILL.
-       Arai-Takahashi, Yutaka, (2002), The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR, Mortsel, Intersentia NV.
-       Arancibia, Jaime, (2011), Judicial Review of Commercial Regulation, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Ayad, Mary B. (2010), “Towards a Truly Harmonized International Commercial and Investment Arbitration Law Code”, Macquarie Journal of Business Law, 7.
-       Beatson, J. Tridimas T., (1998), “The Domestic Liability of Public Authorities in Damages: Lessons from the European Community?”, in ‘New Directions in European Public Law’, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Beever, Allan, (2008), Corrective Justice and Personal Responsibility in Tort Law, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 28(3).
-       Berry, Lee Will, (2011), “Standards of the Standards of Review”, Veterans Law Review, 3.
-       Binder, Christina; Kriebaum, Ursula; Reinisch, August, (2009), International Investment Law for the 21st Century, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Brown, Chester; Miles, Kate, (2011), Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
-       Burke-White, William W.; Von Staden, Andreas, (2007), “Investment Protection in Extraordinary Times: The Interpretation and Application of Non-Precluded Measures Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties”, Journal of International Law, 48.
-       Burke-White, William W.; Von Staden, Andreas, (2010), “Private Litigation in a Public Law Sphere: The Standard of Review” in Investor-State Arbitrations, Yale Journal of International Law, 35.
-       Del Moral, Ignacio de la Rasilla, (2006), “The Increasingly Marginal Appreciation of the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine”, German Law Journal, 7 (6).
-       Dodge, William S., (2006), “Investor-State Dispute Settlement between Developed Countries: Reflections on the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 39 (1).
Dominice, Christian, (1999), “the International Responsibility of States for Breach of Multilateral Obligation”, European Journal of International Law, 10 (2).
Dupuy, Pierre-Marrie, (1999), “Reviewing the Difficulties of Codification: on Ago's Classification of Obligation of Means and Obligation of Result in Relation to State Liability”, European Journal of International Law, 10 (2).
-       Forowicz, Magdalena, (2010), The Reception of International Law in the European Court of Human Rights, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Franck, Susan D., (2007), “Foreign Direct Investment, Investment Treaty Arbitration and the Rule of Law”, McGeorge Law Journal, 19.
-       Fuller, Lon L., (1978), the Forms and Limits of Adjudication, Harvard Law Review, 92.
-       Gelinas, Fabien, (2005), “Investment Tribunals and the Commercial Arbitration Model: Mixed Procedures and Creeping Institutionalization”, Sustainable Development in World Trade Law, London, Kluwer Law International.
-       Harlow, Carol, (2005), Understanding Tort Law, London, Sweet & Maxwell.
-       Kim, Nam-Kook, (2013), Globalization and Regional Integration in Europe and Asia, Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
-       Korobkin, Russell B., (2000), “Behavioral Analysis and Legal Form: Rules vs. Standards Revisited”, Oregon Law Review, 79.
-       Park, James J., (2003), the Constitutional Tort Action as Individual Remedy, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 38.
-       Park, William W.  ‘Private Disputes and the Public Good: Explaining Arbitration Law’ 20 American University International Law Review 903 (2004–2005), p. 905.
-       Raustiala, Kal; Bodansky, Daniel, (2004), “Rules vs. Standards in International Environmental Law”, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), 98.
-       Rubin, Edward; Feeley, Malcolm M., (2003), “Judicial Policy Making and Litigation against the Government”, Journal of Constitutional Law, 5(3).
-       Schauer, Frederick, (1993), Playing by the Rules: A Philosophical Examination of Rule-Based Decision Making in Law and in Life, London, Clarendon Press.
-       Schill, Stephan W, (2010), International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Schlag, Pierre J., (1985), “Rules and Standards”, UCLA Law Review, 33.
-       Sullivan, E. Thomas; Frase, Richard S., (2009), Proportionality Principles in American Law: Controlling Excessive Government Actions, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
-       Sunstein, Cass R., (1995), “Problems with Rules”, California Law Review, 83.
-       Vadi, Valentina, and Lukasz Gruszczynski. "Standards of review in international investment law and arbitration: multilevel governance and the commonweal." Journal of International Economic Law 16.3 (2013): 613-633.
-       Vasani, Sarah, (2010), “Bowing to the Queen: Rejecting the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine” in International Investment Arbitration, Investment Treaty Arbitration and International Law, New York, Juris.
-       Van Harten, Gus, and Martin Loughlin. "Investment treaty arbitration as a species of global administrative law." European Journal of International Law 17.1 (2006): 121-150.
-       Case No. T-19/01, Chiquita Brands International, Inc. (2005) ECR II-315.
-       Case No. ARB/02/1 Award (ICSID), LG&E v Argentine Republic, Award (2006).
-       Case No. ARB/03/9 (ICSID), Continental Casualty Company/Argentine Republic, (2008).
-       Case No. 126/2003 Final Award (ICSID), Petrobart v. Kyrgyz Republic, (2005).
-       Case No. ARB/01/11 Award (ICSID), Noble Ventures v. Romania, (2005).
-       Case (no. 1), 2006-V Eur.Ct.H.R., Scordino v. Italy, (2006).
-       US Model of Treaty Concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment (2004).