国际投资仲裁证据特免权的实践与规制  

Practice and Regulation of Evidentiary Privilege in International Investment Arbitration

作　　者：汪星岑 杜焕芳[1,2] Wang Xingcen;Du Huanfang

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院 [2]国际商事争端预防与解决研究院

出　　处：《国际法研究》2020年第2期104-116,共13页Chinese Review of International Law

基　　金：2019年北京市社会科学基金重点项目《互联网金融仲裁与金融监管协调研究》(19FXA002)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：国际投资仲裁中的证据特免权源起于英美法系的证据特免权理论,并借鉴相关的国内法规则和国际仲裁规则得以建立。律师—当事人特免权存在诉讼特免权和法律意见特免权两种形态。有关政治敏感信息特免权主要关注政府审议和决策中的信息和条约协商中的相关信息。商业秘密特免权虽经讨论但并无成案确认实践的可行性。仲裁庭处理证据特免权的实践路径倾向于冲突规范的解决路径,以最密切联系原则为原则,辅以最惠国待遇原则。对于特免权规范的选择往往以遵循双方意愿为前提,并考虑争议双方的合理期待。鉴于“一带一路”沿线国家和地区的复杂法律环境,中方企业在投资争端解决中应积极利用证据特免权保障自身程序利益,审慎衡量拒绝证据开示的实质性后果,并恰当应对对方当事人的证据特免权主张。Evidentiary privilege in international investment arbitration emerges from the evidentiary privilege which is readily recognized in common law jurisdictions,learning from certain national regulations and international arbitration rules.There are two kinds of lawyer-client privilege,including litigation privilege and legal advice privilege.The discussion concerning evidentiary privilege on politically sensitive documents focuses on deliberative process and treaty negotiation process.Although commercial secret used to be alleged and discussed in certain cases,no precedent could sustain the existence of commercial secret privilege.The practical method to settle the claim of privilege is conflict norms,which includes the closest connection test as main test and the most favourable treatment approach as supplemental.In international practice,when making the choice on which jurisdiction s rules of privilege should be applied,arbitrators would respect parties autonomy and consider parties legitimate expectations.In view of the complex legal environment in the countries along“Belt and Road Initiative”,Chinese corporations could positively argue for privilege claims in dispute settlement process to protect own rights,weigh prudently about the substantial effects of adverse inference caused by non-production,respond privilege claims properly.

关 键 词：证据特免权 国际投资仲裁 证据开示 “一带一路”倡议 

分 类 号：D996.4[政治法律—经济法学]