超越Abaclat:投资条约仲裁中的大量索赔和主权债务重组的监管治理

K. Nakajima
{"title":"超越Abaclat:投资条约仲裁中的大量索赔和主权债务重组的监管治理","authors":"K. Nakajima","doi":"10.1163/22119000-12340071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whereas investment treaties and arbitration rules do not usually provide any explicit provision for mass claims in investment treaty arbitration, the Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina established a landmark jurisprudence that allowed a massive 60,000 investors to bundle and bring their claims before a single arbitral tribunal. However, its reasoning has been severely criticised for its conclusion, which apparently favours bondholder protection at the expense of financial policy leeway of defaulted sovereigns: investment arbitration may adversely affect the orderly implementation of sovereign debt restructuring. This article attempts to take a more balanced approach towards this issue, by focusing on regulatory aspects of arbitral proceedings. A ‘regulatory’ investment treaty arbitration will not only provide creditor protection by opening the door for mass claims, but will also show a deference to an orderly restructuring by closing the door if circumstances so require.","PeriodicalId":163787,"journal":{"name":"The journal of world investment and trade","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Abaclat : Mass Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Regulatory Governance for Sovereign Debt Restructuring\",\"authors\":\"K. Nakajima\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22119000-12340071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Whereas investment treaties and arbitration rules do not usually provide any explicit provision for mass claims in investment treaty arbitration, the Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina established a landmark jurisprudence that allowed a massive 60,000 investors to bundle and bring their claims before a single arbitral tribunal. However, its reasoning has been severely criticised for its conclusion, which apparently favours bondholder protection at the expense of financial policy leeway of defaulted sovereigns: investment arbitration may adversely affect the orderly implementation of sovereign debt restructuring. This article attempts to take a more balanced approach towards this issue, by focusing on regulatory aspects of arbitral proceedings. A ‘regulatory’ investment treaty arbitration will not only provide creditor protection by opening the door for mass claims, but will also show a deference to an orderly restructuring by closing the door if circumstances so require.\",\"PeriodicalId\":163787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of world investment and trade\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of world investment and trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340071\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of world investment and trade","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

尽管投资条约和仲裁规则通常不会对投资条约仲裁中的大规模索赔提供任何明确规定,但Abaclat诉阿根廷案的仲裁庭建立了一个具有里程碑意义的判例,允许6万多名投资者将其索赔捆绑在一起,提交给一个仲裁庭。然而,其推理因其结论而受到严厉批评,该结论显然有利于以牺牲违约主权国家的金融政策回旋余地为代价保护债券持有人:投资仲裁可能对主权债务重组的有序实施产生不利影响。本文试图通过关注仲裁程序的监管方面,对这一问题采取一种更为平衡的方法。“监管性”投资条约仲裁不仅将为大规模索赔打开大门,从而为债权人提供保护,而且还将在情况需要时关闭大门,以示对有序重组的尊重。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Beyond Abaclat : Mass Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Regulatory Governance for Sovereign Debt Restructuring
Whereas investment treaties and arbitration rules do not usually provide any explicit provision for mass claims in investment treaty arbitration, the Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina established a landmark jurisprudence that allowed a massive 60,000 investors to bundle and bring their claims before a single arbitral tribunal. However, its reasoning has been severely criticised for its conclusion, which apparently favours bondholder protection at the expense of financial policy leeway of defaulted sovereigns: investment arbitration may adversely affect the orderly implementation of sovereign debt restructuring. This article attempts to take a more balanced approach towards this issue, by focusing on regulatory aspects of arbitral proceedings. A ‘regulatory’ investment treaty arbitration will not only provide creditor protection by opening the door for mass claims, but will also show a deference to an orderly restructuring by closing the door if circumstances so require.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Quantum (In)Justice: Rethinking the Calculation of Compensation and Damages in ISDS The Mexican Front-of-Pack Labeling Reform: Is It Compatible with International Trade Law? Eiser v Spain – Unprecedented Annulment of an ICSID Award for Improper Constitution of the Tribunal Procedural Issues in International Investment Arbitration, written by Jeffery Commission and Rahim Moloo The Judicialisation of the Social License to Operate: Criteria for International Investment Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1