特区电路决策强调需要谨慎起草东道国协议中法律选择条款

Nikhil Gore AllanB摩尔和杰斯密 — Tue, 2020年6月30日15:51:10+00

p对齐='Center''s/p>项目开发协议常受东道国法律约束(有时有冻结、稳定化条款或其他限制条款),同时受中立地点仲裁约束。假设中立地点法院拥有专属权限监督仲裁并确认或撤销任何仲裁裁决。

A决定由美国上星期发布上诉法院Circuit in P&ID v.i) 拒绝选择东道国实体法并(二) 特别在不可能实现时,包括确认当事人协议的明确语言,即尽管选择东道国法律管辖合同解释,仲裁过程受仲裁所在地法管。 <法院传统上解释下划线语言只允许由程序法管辖仲裁的州法院撤销。万博体育app手机登录233:“尽管《公约》没有就`根据法律'表达的含义提供指导,但除极少数例外外,法院普遍拒绝这些术语指准据法的论点。法院判定它指准仲裁程序法

a上星期五发布电路似乎偏离传统观点,建议实体法适用于争议案情的州法院可撤销裁决。具体地说,法院表示 : “ 纽约公约确认,由自主实体法法院和仲裁发生地君主法院可撤销或中止裁决”(slipopop.,p.)。九号机

有理由怀疑法院的意见是否反映了对传统观点的深思拒绝。电路确认,V(1)(e)条[《纽约公约中`根据它的法律'短语..程序法指仲裁,而非实体法指协议。”见,例如 ,,668F3d724731Cir市2012.此处法院语言可能受争议法异常选择规定的影响,特别是法院摘要(lipop.op.p.pstime-left:40px;'By用条件规范合同,它规定根据尼日利亚仲裁和调和法在伦敦仲裁。

换句话说,当事双方明文选择尼日利亚法律规范实质和程序,因此法院尽管明确引用“实体法”,可能不注重实体法和程序法的区别。

但也有理由不驳回法院选词, 特别是d.C电路公司的意见可结合处理是否推定当事人实体法控制仲裁过程的其他法域的裁决阅读。最近由EnkaInsaat vChubb ,EWCACiv574, 英格兰和威尔士上诉法院远未采纳这种推定,但仍持此观点(atp.),“主合同中有明示选择法律可能相当于明文选择[程法。”根据这一观点,除非合同对实体法和程序法作明确区分,否则“实体法管辖仲裁的君主法院”可能往往拥有撤销裁决的管辖权。

/hetherdd.CCircuit referred to "substantive law" purposefully or inadvertently, the decision underscores the risk that, in agreeing to the host state's law to govern a project development or other host country agreement, an investor may unwittingly confer on host state courts the power to supervise arbitration proceedings and set aside arbitral awards, thus undermining the expectation that only the courts of the neutral seat of the arbitration will have this power. Clear drafting can mitigate this risk. In particular:

Where possible, investors should resist selection of the host state's substantive law.
Where it is not possible to resist selection of the host state's substantive law, investors should seek clear contractual language specifying that the procedural law of the arbitration is the law of the seat of the arbitration, and not the law of the host state, and that the courts of the seat have exclusive supervisory jurisdiction over arbitrations arising under the relevant agreement.

Drafted carefully, such language can reinforce that the parties considered and specifically rejected any implication that the host state's courts could exercise supervisory jurisdiction over arbitrations between them.

艾伦B摩尔内部能源和环境Covington & Burling法律事务所

特区电路决策强调需要谨慎起草东道国协议中法律选择条款