论文部分内容阅读
解决投资争端国际中心在“沙漠道路工程公司诉也门”案中,首次明确肯定了东道国因违反双边投资协定,应当向投资者承担精神损害的赔偿责任。根据案件的实际情况,该裁决具有一定的合理性。但是,在仲裁庭的管辖权、精神损害赔偿责任的构成要件,以及东道国赔偿责任的法理基础这些关键问题上,ICSID仲裁庭的分析和说理存在较大缺陷,从而削弱了该案裁决的正当性和影响力。
For the first time, the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes stated clearly in “Desert Road Engineering Company v. Yemen” case that the host country should bear the liability for moral damage to investors for violating the BIT. According to the actual situation of the case, the ruling has a certain rationality. However, the ICSID arbitral tribunal's analysis and rationale have great flaws in the arbitration tribunal's jurisdiction, the constitutional elements of liability for mental damages, and the legal basis of the host country's liability, thus weakening the legitimacy of the case's decision And influence.