【作者】 李静；

【导师】 黄晓燕；

【作者基本信息】 山西大学 ， 经济法学， 2022， 硕士

【摘要】 随着经济全球化的发展,相关主体之间的法律纠纷也日趋增多,国际投资仲裁成为国家与外国投资者之间解决国际投资争端的重要方法。国家财产执行豁免的研究对于国际投资仲裁裁决执行是一个重要的问题。国家豁免理论从产生以来就有管辖豁免与执行豁免之分。在实践中,大多数国家执行豁免和管辖豁免分开处理,但是,裁决的执行受仲裁执行地的法院管辖,东道国通常会以国家财产执行豁免为由规避国际投资仲裁裁决的执行,从而对他国投资者造成实际损失,同时东道国对国家财产执行豁免权的主张也可能被认为是对他国投资者的间接征收。因此在国际投资仲裁裁决的执行中,如何区分国家财产以及何种情形下可以援引国家财产执行豁免权,国家财产执行豁免权的放弃方式等问题的明确具有重要的意义。在国际投资仲裁的实践中,我国采取的是绝对豁免的态度,包括执行豁免和管辖豁免。也就是说,我国不承认其他国家司法部门对我国国家作为仲裁当事方的管辖权,并且,对于其他国家法院对我国的国家财产采取的强制措施也不予认可,包括在判决前和判决后扣押和冻结国家财产。我国现有的法律体系中还没有专门的国家豁免法作为涉诉依据,不能够充分保护我国国家与企业作为国际投资仲裁裁决当事方的利益。因此,我国国家财产执行豁免立场应尽快由绝对豁免过渡到限制豁免,制定并颁布国家豁免法,以保护我国国家和投资者参与国际投资的合法权益。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the development of economic globalization,legal disputes between relevant subjects are also increasing.International investment arbitration has become an important method to solve international investment disputes between the state and foreign investors.The research on the immunity of state property execution is an important issue for the execution of international investment arbitration awards.The theory of state immunity has been divided into jurisdictional immunity and executive immunity since its emergence.In practice,most state execution immunity and jurisdictional immunity are dealt with separately.However,the execution of the award is subject to the jurisdiction of the court where the arbitration is executed.The host country usually evades the execution of the international investment arbitration award on the grounds of state property execution immunity,resulting in actual losses to investors in other countries.At the same time,the claim of the host country on the immunity of state property execution may also be considered as an indirect expropriation on investors in other countries.Therefore,in the implementation of international investment arbitration awards,it is of great significance to clarify how to distinguish state property and under what circumstances state property execution immunity can be invoked,and the waiver of state property execution immunity.In the current practice of international investment arbitration,China adopts the attitude of absolute immunity,including immunity from execution and immunity from jurisdiction.In other words,China does not recognize the jurisdiction of the judicial departments of other countries over China as a party to the arbitration,and does not recognize the compulsory measures taken by the courts of other countries on Chinese state property,including the seizure and freezing of state property before and after the judgment.There is no special state immunity law as the basis of litigation in Chinese current legal system,which can not fully protect the interests of Chinese state and enterprises as parties to international investment arbitration awards.Therefore,Chinese position on immunity from state property execution should be transformed from absolute immunity to restricted immunity as soon as possible,and state immunity law should be formulated and promulgated to protect the legitimate rights and interests of our country and investors to participate in international investment.更多还原