论文部分内容阅读
欧盟ETS指令要求起降于欧盟境内的所有航班的全部航程所排放的二氧化碳量纳入温室气体排放贸易体制。该项指令引发多国航空业的极力反对,美国航协及航空公司因此诉至欧盟法院,以败诉告终。尽管该指令因外交压力而暂缓执行,但由此引发的如何从法律上解决外国航空企与国家之间航空争端的问题仍然悬而未决。从投资法的角度看,航空企业在外国的服务具有投资属性,任何违背国际法的国内立法均侵害了企业根据双边投资协定所应享有的公平公正待遇,而当前BIT中的最惠国待遇对ICSID的管辖权的同意做了极大扩张。因此,非国家中心主义的国际投资仲裁就成为该类争端解决的另一种可能路径。
The EU ETS Directive requires that the amount of CO2 emitted over the full range of all flights taking off and landing in the European Union be included in the greenhouse gas trading system. The directive triggered strong opposition from multinational aviation industry, the United States and Airline therefore sued the European Court of Justice, the defeat ended. Although the directive was postponed due to diplomatic pressure, the question of how to legally resolve the aviation dispute between foreign aviation enterprises and the country remains unresolved. From the point of view of investment law, aviation services in foreign countries have investment attributes. Any domestic legislation that violates international law infringes upon the fair and equitable treatment that enterprises should enjoy under the BITs. However, the current most-favored nation status in BITs has jurisdiction over ICSID The consent of the right to do a great expansion. Therefore, non-state-owned international investment arbitration has become another possible way to resolve such dispute.