检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:钱嘉晨
机构地区:[1]华东政法大学国际法学院,上海
出 处:《争议解决》2024年第1期557-566,共10页Dispute Settlement
摘 要:近年来,随着国际投资活动的兴起,投资仲裁制度得到了迅速发展,紧急仲裁规则旨在弥合争端发生和提交法庭之间的时间差,确保临时措施得以执行,同时保障紧急仲裁员的独立地位,尽量减少司法机构的干预。然而,紧急仲裁作为一种比较新的机制,在起步阶段也存在一些问题。投资条约纠纷中投资者越来越倾向于寻求紧急救济措施,因此紧急仲裁是否适用于投资条约纠纷值得重视。本文对紧急仲裁程序规则进行比较分析,并通过实证分析仲裁案例,为投资条约争端中的紧急仲裁提出完善路径。In recent years, with the rise of international investment activities, the system of investment arbitration had developed rapidly, and emergency arbitration rules aimed at bridging the gap between the occurrence of disputes and their submission to the Tribunal and ensuring the implementation of interim measures, while ensuring the independence of emergency arbitrators and minimizing interference by the judiciary. However, as a relatively new mechanism, emergency arbitration has some problems at the initial stage. As more and more investors seek emergency measures in investment treaty disputes, it is necessary to pay attention to whether emergency arbitration is applicable to investment treaty disputes. Through comparative analysis of emergency arbitration rules and empirical analysis of arbitration cases, this paper puts forward a perfect way for emergency arbitration in investment treaty disputes.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.28