Chapter Seven: PRC's Experiences and Lessons in International Investment Arbitrations from the Perspective of the Future of PRC-Colombia Investment
| Autor | Yong Liang |
| Cargo del Autor | Associate Professor, Fudan University Law School, Ph.D. in Law 09', Fulbright Visiting Scholar (2018-2019) hosted by Columbia Law School, International Fox Fellow (2007-2008) |
| Páginas | 183-234 |
183
chapter seven
prc’s experiences and lessons in international
investment arbitrations from the perspective
of the future of prc-colombia investment
yong liang*
SuMMary. 1. Background; 1.1. PrC involvement in in-
ternational investment arbitrations; 2. Can Sino-foreign
BITs be applied to both Hong Kong investors and Macao
investors?; 2.1. The Tza Yap Shum vs. Peru Case; 2.2. The
Sanum Investments Ltd. vs. Laos Case; 2.3. Case Analysis;
2.4. Summary; 3. Temporal jurisdiction of successive bits;
3.1. The Ping An vs. Belgium Case; 3.2. Case Analysis;
3.3. Comments; 4. Can the Mfn clause be applied to dispute
settlement procedures?; 4.1. Case analysis; 4.2. The general
practice of the iCSid concerning the extended application
of the Mfn clause to dispute settlement mechanism; 5. PrC
investment risks and potential resolutions in Colombia;
5.1. Background of PrC investment in Colombia; 5.2. In-
vestment risks and potentional resolutions in Colombia;
6. Summary; 7. References
* Associate Professor, Fudan University Law School, Ph.D. in Law 09’, Fulbright
Visiting Scholar (2018-2019) hosted by Columbia Law School, International
Fox Fellow (2007-2008). Contact via liangyong@fudan.edu.cn.
The paper is the intermediary research report of the project: Research on
International Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism Innovations under
the “One Belt and One Road” Initiative, granted by the China Legal Society
(No. ClS (2018) C36).
184 Yong Liang
abStraCt. After more than 40 years of rapid development
following the “Reform and Opening-Up” policy, PrC has
become one of the largest capital-exporting states in the
world. Under the guidance of the “Going-Out” Strategy,
more and more Chinese investors are going abroad to make
outbound investment, with respect to which they encoun-
ter more risks. How to protect the outbound investment
becomes a critical issue for Chinese investors and the PrC
Government. The objective of this article is therefore to look
at the key analytical issues related to the topic of the dispute
settlement from the perspective of capital-exporting state,
and focusing on the impact of future mutual investment
with Colombia and considering the possible improvements
with regards the PrC-Colombia bit.
KEy WordS. International Investment Arbitration; Ping
An-Belgium Case; Outbound Investment; Legal Dispute
Mechanism.
1. baCKground
The People’s Republic of China (henceforth “PrC”) has been
the second largest capital-importing state since 1992 and, in
recent years, it has also become a developing capital-export-
ing state. Compared to relatively stable capital importing,
the PrC’s outbound foreign direct investment (“ofdi”) has
increased rapidly in the past few years. Its ofdi outflows
in 2015 reached uSd 145.67 billion, increasing by 18.31%
compared to 2014, occupying about 9.9% of the global fdi
outflows (which were only 0.4% in 2002), and reaching a
peak since 2011. At the same time, the PrC’s inbound foreign
direct investment (“fdi”) in 2015 reached uSd 135.6 billion.
The surplus between PrC’s ofdi and PrC’s fdi is more than
uSd 10 billion. PrC has become the net capital-exporting
country in 2015.
185
prc’s Experiences and Lessons in International Investment Arbitrations...
tablE 1: StatiStiCS of PrC’S ofdi (2002-2015)
unit: uSd 100 Million
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
14000,0
12000,0
10000,0
8000,0
6000,0
4000,0
2000,0
0,0 299 332 448 572.0 906.3 1179.1
1839.7 2457.5
3172.1
4247.8
5319.4
6135.9
Accumulated Outward FDI
Outward
FDI
Flows
8826.4
10978.6
1.1. prc involvement in international investment
arbitrations
As a state with big fdi inflows and outflows, irrevocably
PrC investors and the PrC Government have encountered
more investment disputes. By the end of 2016, PrC had been
involved in 9 investor-state dispute settlement (“iSdS”) cases,
among which, PrC investors have been involved in 7 cases
as complaints (including Hong Kong investors), and the PrC
Government has been involved in 2 cases as respondents.
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba