Research On The International Investment Court System Advocated By The European Unio

In the World Investment Report 2015,the reform of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement(ISDS)mechanism was listed as one of the five key areas for reform of the international investment system.Currently,there are four key influential ISDS reform programs :(1)the Investment Court System(ICS)initiated by the European Union;(2)modification and perfection of ICSID;(3)assessment mechanism on the leveling of rule of law;(4)the regional investment tribunal program.The four schemes of solutions are not mutually exclusive,and they can complement each other.Compared with the existing ICSID mechanism,the international investment court system advocated by the European Union showed greater certainty and higher efficiency,targeting the ISDS core issues involved,balancing the rights of investors and the host country.It shall be regarded as a more promising and probilistic ISDS reform solution.In view of this,this paper intends to make a special study on the international investment court system initiated by the European Union,in order to sort out its merits,analyze its shortcomings,and make a brief discussion on the probable Chinese ISDS scheme.In addition to the introduction,this paper is divided into six parts,as follows:Chapter One: the development process of the international investment court system advocated by the European Union.This part not only sorts out the devolpment of the international investment court system from the perspective of time,but also compares and analyzes the main differences between it and the other three schemes mentioned above,and preliminarily discusses the attributes of the international investment court.On the attribute issue,it should be clarified that the international investment court proposed by the European Union is difficult to be characterized simply as "arbitration or judicial".As a dispute settlement scheme,it has the attributes of the dichotomy of both the arbitral tribunal and the court,so the expressions of "court" and "judge","arbitral tribunal" and "arbitrator" will simutaniously be applied in the dissertation.Chapter Two: the value pursuit of the international investment court system constructed by the European Union.The values that a dispute settlement mechanism should generally include: fairness,efficiency,confidentiality,transparency,and independence.On the premise that these values are in conflict in some cases,this section examines the efforts and attempts of the international investment court system to balance fairness and efficiency,confidentiality and transparency,and the high respect of independence.Chapter Three: the trigger mechanism of the international investment court system created by the European Union.This part mainly analyzes the jurisdiction design of the international investment court system and its legitimate participants.As far as jurisdiction is concerned,this part mainly investigates from three dimensions: subject,time and cause.In addition,this part also discusses possible solutions when there is jurisdictional conflict with other dispute settlement mechanisms,such as fork in the road clause,waiver clause,parallel clause,doctrine of comity,and stare decisis et non quieta movere.As for eligible participating parties,the department mainly discusses the qualifications and independence of arbitrators,the scope of claimants,the rights of the host country and non-disputable third parties such as amicus curiae and financing third-party.Chapter Four: the trial and appeal mechanism of the international investment court system advocated by the European Union.A prominent feature of the international investment court system is the establishment of the court of first instance and the court of appeal.In the court of first instance,the section analysed its basic structure and terms of reference,using the TTIP proposal text and two agreements between the EU and Vietnam and between the EU and Canada as samples.The establishment of the trial court has the characteristics of permanence,and its functions and powers mainly involve the pre-rejection,the facts review,the application of the law and the expenses.In the court of appeal,the department has mainly analysed its nature and composition,the scope and standards of review,the design of procedures,and the costs.The combination of these aspects helps us to understand the efforts of the appellate court system to achieve effective oversight within the investment dispute settlement scheme.Chapter Five: the enforcement mechanism of the international investment court system initiated by the EU.Whether the award can be implemented in an effective way in most cases is one of the most important indicators to judge the merits of a dispute settlement mechanism.This part mainly starts with the nature of the judgment of the international investment court,analyzes the possible difficulties faced by the execution of the judgment,and discusses the possible schemes to strengthen the execution force and the effect of the judgment.Chapter Six: China’s response to the international investment court system constructed by the European Union.The international investment dispute settlement mechanism is undoubtedly an important part of the bilateral investment negotiations between China and the European Union.Based on the practice of the international investment dispute settlement system between China and Europe,this paper analyzes the external interests and internal system design issues that should be considered in the process of China’s participation in the negotiation and formulation of the international investment court system.In addition,based on China’s existing position in the field of international investment dispute settlement,this part also puts forward some suggestions on relevant measures that China can take in the future.It should be acknowledged that the international investment court system set up by the European Union is not perfect.It still has many problems of its own,may cause some collateral problems,and cannot completely solve all the problems of ISDS.Therefore,the purpose of this paper is not to advocate this reform plan,but to make a comprehensive analysis of a more promising probabilistic paths in ISDS reform within the scope of the author’s ability,so as to expect to outline China’s road map on how to make progress on this path.