投资转让对投资者求偿权实现的影响及出路  

Impacts of Investment Assignment on Treaty Claim and Solutions

作　　者：张鑫[1,2] Zhang Xin

机构地区：[1]武汉大学 [2]日内瓦大学

出　　处：《北京仲裁》2024年第2期78-94,共17页Beijing Arbitration Quarterly

摘　　要：投资者在受东道国措施影响后,往往会选择出让投资,并与受让投资的继受投资者对求偿权的行使进行安排。求偿权无论是由原始投资者保留还是由继受投资者持有,在行使时都会面对管辖权障碍。原始投资者的管辖权困境源于实践中对确定国籍、投资存在的关键日期存在分歧;继受投资者则受限于难以逾越的属时管辖障碍。相较于诸如政治风险保险以及第三方资助的主流救济方式,投资与求偿权规划更具成本优势,在全球化进程疲软以及东道国规制权回归的当下,投资转让与求偿权规划对于受损的投资者有着巨大的经济价值,对释放资产价值、促进资本流动有着积极意义。对此,应厘清相关管辖规则,明确以违约之日为判断管辖权是否存在的关键日,并且允许继受投资者以原始投资者的名义提起仲裁,从而确保投资者求偿权的实现。After being affected by the measures of the host state,a foreign investor may sell the investment and dispose of the treaty claim.Regardless of the ultimate ascription of the claim,the claimant may confront with multiple jurisdictional barriers.The jurisdiction hurdle for the assignor-investor stems from the divergence of the critical date to decide the nationality and existence of the investment,while the assignee investor is trapped by the insurmountable ratione temporis.Compared with the main remedies such as political risk insurance and third-party funding,the investment and treaty claim trade is more costeffective.Against the backdrop of deglobalization and enhancing the right to regulate,the economic value of the transaction for releasing assets and liberating capital flows shall not be ignored.Therefore,for promoting the realization of treaty claim,it is advisable to apply the date of breach as the critical date to determine jurisdiction,and allow assignee investor to initiate arbitration in the name of the original investor.

关 键 词：投资仲裁 投资转让 求偿权 管辖权 

分 类 号：F83[经济管理—金融学]