| International investment has increasingly become one of the most important forms of economic cooperation between countries. As the adjustment of investment activities among countries, Bilateral Investment Treaties(abbreviated as "BITs") has played an important role not only in regulating the activities of foreign investors and the actions of host government, but also in resolving investment disputes between them. In the past decades, an increasing number of countries entered into a conditional agreement to accept, or even fully accept the jurisdiction of ICSID on the matters under dispute settlement provisions of BITs. So ICSID, which was ignored by most countries for a long time, has been paid more and more attention.I start from the above background and focus on dispute settlement provisions of BITs, combined with an analysis of the ICSID cases. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into five chapters:The first chapter introduces the history and development of dispute settlement provisions BITs. From the vertical point of view, I first introduce the BITs of early times, and then the new development of BITs in recent years. From the horizontal point of view, I have done a comparative introduction between some developed countries and the developing countries. Through this Chapter, I hope we can have a macroscopic knowledge of BITs and understand the development trend of BIT from the two kinds of contrasts, thus this chapter can play as a basis for the further discussion in this thesis.The second chapter introduces the exhaustion of local remedies, one of the ways of relief in dispute settlement provisions of BITs. This chapter is mainly about the content, exception and the application in international investment arbitration of exhaustion of local remedies. "Fork in the road clause" and its practice in the ICSID arbitration case has been analyzed in this part. Then I list and compare the examples of BITs of developed countries such as the United States, Canada and developing countries such as China in terms of exhaustion of local remedies. The stopover of this chapter is the importance of exhaustion of local remedies in safeguarding the sovereignty of the host country.The third chapter introduces the arbitration jurisdiction of ICSID, another way of relief in dispute settlement provisions of BITs. The chapter is focus on specific problems ICSID encountered in practice. These problems are mainly about the "umbrella clause", the MFN clause being applied to matters of dispute settlement, and four kinds of accepting the jurisdiction of ICSID. And then I still list and compare the developed and developing countries in the relevant provisions of BITs. This chapter mainly evaluates the strategies that foreign investors use to seek the ICSID arbitration relief and the views of ICSID arbitral tribunal on these issues.Chapter IV introduces the definition of "investment", which is also related to the arbitration jurisdiction of ICSID in provisions of BITs. Besides specific procedural provisions of BITs, the definition of"investment"is another factor which affects jurisdiction of investment disputes. The chapter focuses on the lack of definition of "Investment" in ICSID, as well as the new development of the practice of ICSID arbitration on the issue of definition of "investment". From some relevant cases we can see that there is a tendency to expand the arbitration jurisdiction of ICSID, to which the host county should pay more attention.The fifth chapter put forward some recommendations on the dispute settlement provisions of China's BITs. The first is to distinguish developed and developing countries in matters of dispute settlement and give them different treatments; On this basis, I give some specific advices for developed countries and developing countries respectively. The main points are the degree of folding in the arbitration jurisdiction of ICSID and two ways to accept the jurisdiction of ICSID.
|
PDF Full Text Request