国际投资仲裁使用先例的合法性分析  

The Analysis of the Legitimacy of the Use of Precedents in International Investment Arbitration

作　　者：陈云东[1] 程丹萍 Chen Yundong;Cheng Danping(Law School,Yunnan University,Kunming,Yunnan,650000)

机构地区：[1]云南大学法学院,云南昆明650091

出　　处：《重庆社会科学》2024年第4期126-137,共12页Chongqing Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“‘一带一路’倡议的法治化研究”(17BFX013)。

摘　　要：国际投资仲裁庭使用先例的合法性争议产生于传统国际法渊源的实证主义前提和国际投资争端解决实际要求之间的根本张力。国际投资仲裁庭普遍使用先例的实践在高度分散和临时的仲裁庭之间创造了一种非正式的对话。当一系列合理一致的裁决逐渐累加,且其对如何解释条约条款和国际习惯规则的说明具有说服力时,先例就获得了一种集体的规范权重,无论传统学说的教条如何,这种集体话语都具有其自身合法性,构成了国际投资争端解决可适用的独特规范资源,有利于稳固国际投资仲裁机制合法性,协调国际投资仲裁使用既判裁决与传统国际法渊源学说之间的矛盾与冲突。The dispute over the legitimacy of the use of precedents by international investment arbitration tribunals arises from the fundamental tension between the positivist premise of traditional sources of international law and the practical requirements of international investment dispute settlement.The widespread practice of using precedents by international investment arbitration tribunals has created an informal dialogue between highly decentralized and ad hoc arbitral tribunals.When a series of reasonably consistent rulings gradually accumulate,and their explanations of how to interpret treaty provisions and international customary rules are persuasive,precedents acquire a collective normative weight.Regardless of the dogma of traditional doctrine,this collective discourse has its own legitimacy and constitutes a unique normative resource applicable to international investment dispute settlement,which is conducive to stabilizing the legitimacy of the international investment arbitration mechanism and coordinating the contradictions and conflicts between the use of prior decisions in international investment arbitration and traditional doctrine of the sources of international law.

关 键 词：国际投资仲裁 先例 合法性 

分 类 号：D99[政治法律—国际法学]