지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this paper is to introduce ICSID Arbitration and the Washington Convention which have not been known well in Korea, to examine the advantages and disadvantages of the Arbitration System, and to recommend the Model Arbitration Clause to be included in the Investment Agreement.
The ICSID's record of activity is extremely low compared to the ICC Arbitration in which in six years from 1986 to 1991, the annual average number of request for arbitration was more than 300.
The reason for ICSID's low level of activity lies in the limited jurisdiction including its jurisdiction ratione personae and ratione materiae.
The second reason is the fact that the ICSID Arbitration was not well-known. And the parties to investment agreements generally do not like to publicize their disputes, preferring to settle them amicably.
The third reason might be dependent upon the fact that the investors were reluctant to play the role of pioneers for a new institution.
Finally, a fundamental reason relates to the state sovereignty, In this respect, the submission of concrete disputes may prove worrisome for a number of LDCS.
In spite of the above disadvantages, the ICSID Arbitration has very significant positive points.
First, in so far as ICSID's jurisdiction ratione personae is influenced by the number of ratification, with over than 130 signatories of the Convention all over the world, which gives grounds for relative optimism in the future.
Second, We need not have any fear of arbitration biased by the policies of a bureaucratic international organization.
Therefore there is no reason that ICSID Arbitration should not present the same fairness and quality as other international arbitration proceedings.
Third, The Additional Facility may be available where either the sovereign party or the private investor does not qualify for arbitration under the Convention because it or its nation is not a party to the Convention.
Under the Additional Facility, the arbitration may also be available for the settlement of disputes that do not directly arise out of an investment.
The annulment of the ICSID award by an ad hoc committee must be considered as jeopardizing ICSID Arbitration because it clearly depart from the current trends of international commercial arbitration which limits any kinds of judicial review and excludes any kinds of review on the merits.
I hope that the future decisions of the ad hoc committees will restore a narrow scope to the ICSID procedure of annulment in order not to jeopardize the ICSID Arbitration mechanism.
The ICSID Secretariat provides various publications including model clauses. I would like to recommend Model Clause I as follow;
"The parties hereby consent to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes any dispute in relation or arising out of this Agreement for settlement by conciliation arbitration pursuant to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nations of other States".
By the Model Clause 1, all proceeding would be regulated by the Convention and the ICSID "Arbitration Rules" including the major issues, such as the applicable law of the rules governing the arbitral proceedings.
The ICSID's record of activity is extremely low compared to the ICC Arbitration in which in six years from 1986 to 1991, the annual average number of request for arbitration was more than 300.
The reason for ICSID's low level of activity lies in the limited jurisdiction including its jurisdiction ratione personae and ratione materiae.
The second reason is the fact that the ICSID Arbitration was not well-known. And the parties to investment agreements generally do not like to publicize their disputes, preferring to settle them amicably.
The third reason might be dependent upon the fact that the investors were reluctant to play the role of pioneers for a new institution.
Finally, a fundamental reason relates to the state sovereignty, In this respect, the submission of concrete disputes may prove worrisome for a number of LDCS.
In spite of the above disadvantages, the ICSID Arbitration has very significant positive points.
First, in so far as ICSID's jurisdiction ratione personae is influenced by the number of ratification, with over than 130 signatories of the Convention all over the world, which gives grounds for relative optimism in the future.
Second, We need not have any fear of arbitration biased by the policies of a bureaucratic international organization.
Therefore there is no reason that ICSID Arbitration should not present the same fairness and quality as other international arbitration proceedings.
Third, The Additional Facility may be available where either the sovereign party or the private investor does not qualify for arbitration under the Convention because it or its nation is not a party to the Convention.
Under the Additional Facility, the arbitration may also be available for the settlement of disputes that do not directly arise out of an investment.
The annulment of the ICSID award by an ad hoc committee must be considered as jeopardizing ICSID Arbitration because it clearly depart from the current trends of international commercial arbitration which limits any kinds of judicial review and excludes any kinds of review on the merits.
I hope that the future decisions of the ad hoc committees will restore a narrow scope to the ICSID procedure of annulment in order not to jeopardize the ICSID Arbitration mechanism.
The ICSID Secretariat provides various publications including model clauses. I would like to recommend Model Clause I as follow;
"The parties hereby consent to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes any dispute in relation or arising out of this Agreement for settlement by conciliation arbitration pursuant to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nations of other States".
By the Model Clause 1, all proceeding would be regulated by the Convention and the ICSID "Arbitration Rules" including the major issues, such as the applicable law of the rules governing the arbitral proceedings.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. ICSID중재의 관할요건
Ⅲ. 투자계약의 준거법
Ⅳ. 중재절차
Ⅴ. 중재판정의 효과와 집행
Ⅵ. 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
ICSID 중재판정의 취소에 관한 연구 : 우리 중재법과의 비교를 중심으로
무역상무연구
2008 .02
-
ICSID 중재 이용을 위한 투자계약서상의 중재조항의 유효성과 추가쟁점
통상정보연구
2007 .12
-
ICSID 중재제도의 특징에 관한 연구
무역학회지
2008 .08
-
ICSID 중재 제도의 개혁 방향
홍익법학
2017 .01
-
FTA(자유무역협정)에서 투자자 대 국가간 분쟁해결을 위한 국제중재제도
무역상무연구
2008 .05
-
ICSID 중재의 관할권에 관한 연구
무역학회지
2010 .06
-
ICSID중재판정의 실효성에 관한 소고
통상법률
2012 .08
-
FTA 투자협정과 분쟁해결제도에 관한 연구
중재연구
2007 .01
-
상소심 도입 및 제3자 참여의 확대를 통한 투자자-국가 중재 시스템의 제도적 개선
민사법의 이론과 실무
2012 .01
-
국제투자계약상의 중재조항(Arbitration Clause)의 주요 구성요소에 관한 연구
무역상무연구
2008 .05
-
ICSID 중재의 취소제도에 관한 제 고찰
중재연구
2014 .01
-
국제투자중재의 판정취소제도에 관한 연구
관세학회지
2012 .05
-
ICSID중재 상의 투자자에 관한 논점 분석
무역연구
2011 .01
-
ICSID 협약상 투자의 의미
국제법학회논총
2010 .06
-
ICSID의 投資紛爭 解決構造에 관한 考察
중재연구
2004 .01
-
최근 5년간 ICSID 중재판정사례를 중심으로 한 국제투자분쟁의 중요쟁점에 관한 연구
동아법학
2009 .02
-
국가-투자자 간의 분쟁해결을 위한 ICSID 중재에서의 투자ㆍ투자자 개념
국제경제법연구
2010 .11
-
ICSID 중재상 ‘경제개발에의 기여’라는 기준의 의미
통상법률
2016 .02
-
ICSID 중재판정의 집행(enforcement)에 관한 연구
국제사법연구
2019 .12
-
ICSID 상소제도의 도입 필요성
중재연구
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
ICSID 중재의 관할권에 관한 연구
김용일
무역학회지
2010
.06
최근 5년간 ICSID 중재판정사례를 중심으로 한 국제투자분쟁의 중요쟁점에 관한 연구
김용의
동아법학
2009
.02
국가-투자자 간의 분쟁해결을 위한 ICSID 중재에서의 투자ㆍ투자자 개념
김승민
국제경제법연구
2010
.11
계약 및 중재합의 유효성의 소송 대상적격성에 대한 미국 연방대법원의 입장에 관한 연구 : 미국 연방대법원의 Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna(2006) 판례를 중심으로
김상만
동아법학
2011
.02
ICSID 중재제도의 특징에 관한 연구
오원석
,
임성철
,
송수련
무역학회지
2008
.08
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-326-002866542