On Appeal Mechanism Of EU Permanent Investment Court

The EU Permanent Investment Court is the European Union's proposal for an international investment arbitration system in response to the US-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement,which integrates the traditional international investment dispute resolution mechanism framework with the judicialization of the arbitral institution of the permanent appeal mechanism.The appeal mechanism of the EU Permanent Investment Court reflects the contradictory state of the EU position in this proposal,namely the EU's uncertainty in international investment liberalization and Calvoism.The EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism must be analyzed in the context of the entire international investment dispute settlement.Effective and fair settlement of international investment disputes is the standard value of the international investment dispute settlement mechanism.Under the guidance of this value standard,investors and countries The dispute settlement mechanism should develop in a more coordinated and flexible direction.Under these guiding principles and concepts,the EU's permanent investment court should base itself on the realistic requirements of investor-host dispute settlement between investors and the host country.Under the premise of ensuring the independence of judges,properly resolve the unqualified qualification requirements.Inconsistencies with the entire mechanism.The body of this article is divided into six parts:The first part of the article is the introduction,which mainly introduces the research significance,research background,research summary and research methods.The second part of the article is an overview of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism.The main contents include the institutional framework and organizational structure of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism,the system traceability and construction significance.The institutional framework includes the appeals process,the grounds for appeal and the time limit,as defined by Article 29 of the EU TTIP.The EU TTIP recommends that Article 10 mainly stipulates the composition of the Court of Appeal.First,the number of appeal judgesis less than that of the trial judges;secondly,the appeal judges are stricter than the trial judges in terms of qualifications.The EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism was originally derived from the European Union's 2014 free trade agreement with Canada,and was completed in a subsequent free trade agreement with Singapore.The construction of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism includes: first,to enhance the transparency and impartiality of the procedure;second,to enhance the consistency,acceptability and predictability of the referee.The third part of the article compares the similarities and differences between the EU Permanent Investment Court Appeal Mechanism and the International Investment Dispute Resolution Center and the World Trade Organization Appeal Mechanism.The biggest difference between the appeal mechanism of the EU Permanent Investment Court and the appeal mechanism of the International Investment Dispute Resolution Center lies in the mandatory nature of the former.It is this mandatory that better overcomes the optional nature of the appeal mechanism of the International Investment Dispute Resolution Center.Difficulties.Countries lack the motivation to participate in the appeal mechanism of the International Investment Dispute Resolution Center,and there is no incentive to operate the mechanism;and the characteristics of the bilateral investment treaty core of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism solve both problems.The EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism draws heavily on the provisions of the World Trade Organization's appeal mechanism,covering aspects such as standing,judicial,and judges;however,the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism is in the way of production,the level of decision-making bodies,the term of arbitrators,The number of members and so on is very different from the World Trade Organization appeal mechanism,reflecting its characteristics as a regional international judicial institution.The fourth part of the article analyzes and explains the appeal mechanism of the EU Permanent Investment Court from the perspective of the evolution of the overall concept of international investment dispute settlement.The essential pursuit of the appeal mechanism is to alleviate the contradiction between the public law of the arbitration institution and the private law of the arbitration itself.The fundamental goal is to resolve the imbalance in the pursuit of the value of the trial.Secondly,themultilateral trend of the international investment legal system itself has triggered unfair worries about the participation of third parties,which is also an important reason for the appeal mechanism to adhere to multilateral participation.One of the challenges facing the appeal mechanism is how to achieve a transition from a bilateral model to a multilateral model.Appellate bodies established through multilateral treaties are more able to achieve consistency and legitimacy in investment dispute settlement.However,the appeal mechanism under the unified multilateral system is indeed difficult to achieve in the current international investment dispute settlement system.Finally,the development of the appeal mechanism has been greatly affected by the expansion of jurisdiction triggered by the international investment legal system.This influence comes from the expansion of the international investment itself brought about by the deepening of the global economic development and the expansion of the international investment dispute settlement mechanism.The fifth part of the article discusses the reference and enlightenment of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism to China.In the face of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism,in theory,we should consider the two dimensions of the balance between the interests of the host country and investors and the independence of the members of the appeal expert group.First,we need to make clear that under the investment agreement negotiated with the EU,China must adhere to the position of establishing a judicial mechanism under the bilateral investment agreement.The flexibility of the bilateral investment agreement itself and the timely response of the negotiating capacity can be Issues such as the conditions of election,ethical quality,and arbitration fees are relatively broad and in line with the national conditions of both countries,thus effectively avoiding the anachronism of the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism,and cannot rush to advocate the establishment of standardized,unified standing.International investment arbitration appeal mechanism;Secondly,be cautious about the over-corrected situation brought about by the EU's permanent investment court appeal mechanism,based on China's specific national conditions,and against the overall judicialization of international investment arbitration;finally,China should face this in the international investment judicial settlement mechanism.A development trend,through comparative analysis and the introduction of ideas,through the internalization of international law,forced the reform of relevant laws and regulations in domestic law,thereby exerting thecounter-effect of the international rule of law on the domestic rule of law.The sixth part of the article is the conclusion.