关于"一带一路"

Belt and Road Initiative

Since its launch in late 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (the "Initiative") has been one of the most widely discussed topics of our time. The Initiative aims to connect Asia, Europe, and Africa along five routes, focusing on: (1) linking China to Europe through Central Asia and Russia; (2) connecting China with the Middle East through Central Asia; and (3) bringing together China and Southeast Asia, South Asia and the Indian Ocean.  The 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, meanwhile, focuses on using Chinese coastal ports to: (4) link China with Europe through the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean; and (5) connect China with the South Pacific Ocean through the South China Sea.[1]

香港贸易发展局，《一带一路 - 亚欧新秩序》（地图资源），http://beltandroad.hktdc.com/sc/belt-and-road-basics 

The Hong Kong Trade Development Council, "The Belt and Road Initiative - A road map to THE FUTURE (map source)", http://beltandroad.hktdc.com/en/belt-and-road-basics 

根据国家发展和改革委员会（NDRC）2017年3月发布的资料显示，中国已经向近70个"一带一路"沿线国家的基础设施投资超过500亿美元，这也许是中国为恢复两千年前古代丝绸之路所制定的最为雄心勃勃的外交政策。由于政府及私人投资者在海外的直接投资规模如此之庞大，"一带一路"带来了巨大商机的同时，也存在着潜在的风险与争议。 该倡议中的大部分交易为基建项目，这意味着"一带一路"和"一带一路"以外的多个国家将各作为缔约双方而产生大量的合同及协议。同时，这些项目还将揭示不同地区监管制度、司法制度的差异，以及不同国家之间文化和政治环境的差异。

香港作为全球范围内拥有广泛专业人士和商业联系的重要金融中心之一，以拥有健全而独立的法律制度而闻名，也因此将成为"一带一路"外商投资争议解决的优质仲裁平台。

Hong Kong, being one of the major financial centers possessing extensive professional and commercial connections around the globe, and being renowned for having a well-established and independent legal system, also benefits from the Initiative by being an arbitration hub in resolving these foreign investment disputes.  

跨境投资争议带来的风险

Risks for cross-border investment disputes

毋庸置疑，"一带一路"带来了重大的机遇，然而商机总是伴随着风险，尤其存在于"一带一路"沿线不同法律传统和文化的国家之间。因此，建议投资者应关注和意识到风险的存在，并考虑可供他们选择的争议解决方式。

风险之一： 

在某些情况下，对东道国法律制度的不熟悉可能会使我国的国有企业面临不必要的政治风险和法律上的不确定性。考虑到不同国家间传统和法律制度的差异，发生争议时，双方都可能产生对当地法庭规则和法律的不熟悉、对当地法官公正性以及地方政府对法院影响等情况的忧虑。

即使一方获得有利的判决，执行上的失败也可能导致整个判决丧失意义，这会涉及到不同司法管辖区的判决承认与执行规则不尽相同这一矛盾/问题。

Unfamiliarity with the legal system of the host country, in some cases, may expose the Chinese SOEs to excessive degree of political risks and legal uncertainties.  Considering the different traditions and legal regime of the nations along the Initiative, whenever dispute arises, the parties may have real concerns about the unfamiliar court rules and laws, the impartiality of the local judges and undue influence from the local governments to the courts, etc.

Even once the judgment is rendered, the difficulties in enforcement could make the whole proceedings futile. This could arise from issues such as inconsistent judgment enforcement rules in different jurisdictions. 

风险之二：

诉讼程序通常在公开法庭进行，媒体和公众也可以获得有关判决的信息。因此，争议的潜在不良影响和敏感信息披露可能成为"一带一路"各方，特别是国有企业和政府的最大关注点之一。

Litigation proceedings are generally conducted in open courts, where the media and public may have access to both the proceedings and the judgment. The potential reputational damage associated with the disputes and the disclosure of sensitive information during the process can therefore be one of the greatest concerns to the parties of the Initiative, especially for the SOEs and the government.

因此，在争议出现之前提前考虑并设计适合的争议解决机制，更好地管理投资过程中可能产生的风险显得尤为重要。

Thus, it is important for investors to think in advance the available dispute resolution mechanisms before disputes actually arise in order to better manage the risks of participating in the Initiative.  

为何选择仲裁？

Why Arbitration?

尽管相比法院开始诉讼时较低的收费，仲裁似乎需要更多花费，然而国际仲裁仍然不失为一个更有吸引力的替代方案。选择国际仲裁解决跨境争端的各方将受益于：

Though it is relatively expensive, as compared to court fees for initiating a litigation, international arbitration remains to be an attractive dispute resolution alternative. Parties opting for arbitration to resolve cross-border disputes would enjoy the following benefits:

1. 更好的保密性：

一些敏感信息，例如如当事人名称，争议理由和裁决结果都将予以保密，不向公众公布。此外，在香港，不仅仲裁程序是保密的，如果任何一方当事人随后要求将案件提交法院审理，其后的法庭诉讼也不会公开进行，在没有征得争议双方同意的的情况下，法院不得发布与案件有关的信息。

Compared to litigation, confidentiality can be maintained in arbitration: sensitive details such as names of the parties, reasons of dispute, and the outcome will remain confidential. Furthermore, the confidentiality obtained in an arbitration proceeding in Hong Kong would be further preserved by the Hong Kong courts under certain circumstances. If either party subsequently requests to take the matter to court, the subsequent court proceedings will not be openly held and the court will also not be permitted to publish information relevant to the case without the consent of the parties.

2. 更多的自主权：

争议双方有更多自主权选择仲裁员，从而确保争议裁判者是相关熟悉相关领域的专家，而不是毫无相关经验的门外汉;

缔约方也可以决定仲裁程序的其他细节（即仲裁地，仲裁员人数和仲裁程序规则）;

Parties are given the autonomy to choose arbitrators. Thus, it is possible for parties to ensure the arbitrator is someone who knows the trade and practice, rather than someone who lives in the ivory tower and may not know the business;

Parties can also decide on the other details of the arbitration process (i.e. seat of jurisdiction, number of arbitrators, and procedural rules of the arbitration);

3. 更强的中立性

仲裁过程很少涉及当地法院，因此仲裁裁决也相对更少的夹杂政治影响力，从而保持中立。来自不同国家的缔约各方自主选择任命一个中立的仲裁员小组（可能是相关领域的专家）并在各方同意的场所举行仲裁。

The process involves little involvement from local courts; hence arbitration awards will be neutral from any political influence. Parties from different countries can choose to appoint a panel of neutral arbitrators, who may be experts in the relevant area, and to hold the arbitration at a neutral venue; and 

4. 更高的执行力：

仲裁过程更有效率，同时仲裁裁决通常为"一裁终局"的，同时由于《纽约公约》的存在，裁决在大部分国家都可以获得执行。

The process is time efficient. The award will be final and enforceable in all signatory countries of the New York Convention. 

为什么选择香港？

Why Hong Kong?

1. 独立完善的法制背景

香港独拥有得天独厚的地理位置优势，它作为中国的特别行政区，实行"一国两制"基本方略 ，拥有稳定和独立的法律制度和环境，从而使其成为处理"一带一路"仲裁的理想地点。香港的《仲裁条例》包含适用于全球的《贸易法委员会国际商事仲裁示范法》，同时香港的仲裁裁决可在《纽约公约》签署国157个国家内执行[2]，这其中包含了大多数的"一带一路"国家。 

The unique geographic position of Hong Kong, being simultaneously part of China and also a special administrative region under "One Country, Two Systems" doctrine allows it to be the ideal seat of arbitration arising from the Initiative.

Hong Kong has been one of the major financial centers in Asia with a stable and independent legal system. The Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance is governed by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which is applicable globally. Arbitral awards made in Hong Kong are enforceable in 157[2] countries under the New York Convention, including most countries along the five routes of the Initiative. 

2.多元化中外专业人士：

香港拥有熟悉外商投资以及与中方合作的多语种法律和商业界的专业人士。 根据2016的数据显示，香港执业律师8,836人，大律师1,375人[3]。因此，在解决有关"一带一路"相关争议引起的外商投资争议时，香港以其多元的法律、文化背景和专业知识将为中外双方提供充分的支持。这也是香港作为仲裁理想地的原因，既为中方提供文化背景类似的场所来解决争议，又为非中方投资者提供一个独立和中立的法律环境以解决争议。 

香港仲裁裁决在中国内地的承认与执行

The Recognition and Enforcement of Hong Kong Arbitral Awards in PRC

仲裁最大的好处之一就是裁决的可执行性。因此，仲裁裁决的执行将是一带一路合作各方重点关注的焦点。 如上文所述，香港是《纽约公约》的成员之一，意味着在香港获得的仲裁裁决可以在《纽约公约》的157个签署国强制执行。

One of the greatest benefits of Arbitration is the enforceability of the awards. Therefore, the enforceability of the awards will be a key issue for the companies and their Belt and Road counterparties. 

Hong Kong is one of the members of the New York Convention, meaning that the arbitration awards obtained in Hong Kong can be enforceable in 157 signatory nations of the Convention. 

香港与中国大陆于1999年6月21日签署了《互相承认和执行仲裁裁决协议》（以下简称《协议》），使得香港的裁决可以在中国大陆执行。

Also, Hong Kong and Mainland China signed an Agreement on the Mutual Recognition and Enforcement of the Arbitration Award on 21 June 1999 (the "Agreement"). This allows the awards made in Hong Kong to be enforceable in the Mainland China.  

与此同时，随着"一带一路"的启动，中国内地政府对承认和执行外国仲裁裁决也表现出积极的态度。在中国最高法院于2015年7月发布的一项《意见》中，清晰地规定了法院应发挥国际仲裁在"一带一路"中的作用，及时有效地承认和执行外国仲裁裁决[4]。最高人民法院于2017年5月15日发布了涉"一带一路"建设的十起典型案例，在"申请人西门子国际贸易(上海)有限公司与被申请人上海黄金置地有限公司承认和执行外国仲裁裁决一案"中，中国法院认定并执行了两方均为中国法人的外国仲裁裁决。由此可见，内地法院依照《纽约公约》执行外国仲裁表现出了积极的倾向。

Moreover, with the launch of the Initiative, the PRC government also showed a positive attitude regarding the recognition and enforcement of the arbitration awards. In the Opinion released by the PRC Supreme Court in 2015, it was stated that the role of the international arbitration shall be promoted in the Initiative and the foreign arbitral awards shall be promptly and correctly recognized and enforced[4]. Amongst the recent ten cases released by the Supreme People’s Court regarding the Initiative on May 15, 2017, one case between Iemens International (Shanghai) Trading Limited and Shanghai Golden Landmark Co., Ltd showed how a PRC court recognized and enforced a foreign award made in an arbitration between PRC domestic entities. It can be seen that there is a positive tendency of the PRC court to enforce foreign arbitration held in accordance with the New York Convention.

案例分析

Case Study

下述案例假设了"一带一路"比价典型的项目，任何有关商业，地点，事件的相似性纯属巧合。

The following case study outlines a hypothetical and typical Initiative project, any resemblance to business, places, events or incidents is purely coincidental. 

案件事实

Fact

某内地国有企业与"一带一路"基金（简称"BRF"）合作，与西亚某国一家石油天然气公司（简称"西亚公司"）签订了一项合资协议共同开发建设炼油厂，同时国有企业还与该西亚公司签订了石油买卖协议。两项协议争议解决条款均约定由香港国际仲裁中心（HKIAC）根据2013《香港国际仲裁中心机构仲裁规则》（简称"《规则》"）解决 。

A Chinese SOE acting in partnership with a Belt and Road Fund (the "BRF"), entered into a joint venture agreement with a West Asia Oil & Gas Company (the "West Asia Co") for the construction of a refinery. The Chinese SOE also signed a sale and purchase agreement for the purchase of petroleum with advance payment. Both of the agreements contain a dispute resolution clause which provides that dispute that cannot be settled amicably shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration administrated by Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) in accordance with HKIAC 2013 Administrated Arbitration Rules (the "Rules").

项目进行过程中，由于内战导致西亚公司无法完成其在买卖协议项下的义务。更为糟糕的是，该国企被西亚政府禁止进入炼油厂并某收了相关资产。此外，在将争议提交给仲裁庭之前，该国企发现西亚公司有转移资产的倾向。

Later, the West Asia Co. was unable to fulfill its obligation under the sale and purchase agreement because of a civil war in its country. To make things worse, the Chinese SOE was barred by the government of the West Asian nation from accessing the refinery and its equipment is confiscated. The Chinese SOE wanted to bring claims against the West Asia Co for breach of the sale and purchase agreement and to seek compensation for expropriation by the government of its assets. Prior to the formation of the arbitral tribunal and shortly after submitting its notice of arbitration, the Chinese SOE discovered that the West Asian Co. would be transferring its assets. 

选择香港国际仲裁中心 (HKIAC)

Choice of HKIAC

由于选择在香港仲裁，这给了该中国客户根据《规则》指定紧急仲裁员的可能性。根据HKIAC上述规则，紧急仲裁员将在24小时内被任命，并在15天内作出临时性措施（包括禁令），以防止西亚公司的财产转移。仲裁中的这一特殊紧急救济很大程度上避免了当事人如果选择的是西亚当地法院程序，在寻求法院救济过程中可能会出现的延误。

如果双方未达成仲裁协议，该国有企业必须在西亚当地寻找熟悉当地司法程序的律师。然而，特别是在"一带一路"沿线某些欠发达的国家和地区，处理大规模国际争端领域经验丰富的当地律师数量非常有限。同时，在外国当地法院提起诉讼、解决争议也可能引起对争议适用法律、承认执行判决以及当地法官的公正性等一系列问题的担忧。

Had the parties not agreed to arbitration agreements, the Chinese SOE would have to locate appropriate local counsel in the West Asian nation. At the time, there were limited local counsel experienced in handling large-scale international disputes, especially in less developed countries along the Belt and Road. Having a dispute litigated in a foreign court may also raise concerns about the governing law, the recognition of the judgment, the impartiality of the local judge, etc. 

对于案例中的中国国有企业和政府基金来说，案件的保密性显得尤为重要。投资项目的细节、判决赔偿金额等信息对于"一带一路"中的各合作方是非常敏感的信息。然而诉讼的程序与判决通常是公开的，因此，在涉及到政府或国有企业的项目里，仲裁良好的保密性显得更具吸引力。

In this case, confidentiality of the case was important for both the Chinese SOE and the government fund. Litigation proceedings are usually conducted in open court and the judgments are publicly available. The fact of the project, the compensation amount of the judgment etc. are usually very sensitive to the parties regarding the case of Initiative. Therefore, privacy and confidentiality of the arbitration are more attractive in cases where the government or SOE are involved. 

相比各地区的诉讼程序，各方在仲裁中获得的自主权也更多，包括争议解决的地点和适用的规则。本案中，各方选择了在香港国际仲裁中心解决争议，可享受到如下特定的优势：

Whereas domestic litigation proceedings are often inflexible, parties are given more autonomy in the arbitration, including the seat of the arbitration and the rules that they will apply. Parties in this case choose Hong Kong and HKIAC may enjoy the below benefits:

双边投资条约下的权利

Bilateral investment treaty rights

从另一个角度来说，如果中国和该西亚国家存在双边投资协定（BIT）[6]，中国客户也可考虑在该投资协定下启动受到不公正待遇的救济。 

Separately, the Chinese SOE can also commence an investment treaty arbitration if there is an existing Bilateral investment treaty (BIT) between China and the west Asian nation to get the compensation regarding the unfair expropriation. [6]

为何选择仲裁？

Conclusion

"一带一路"的提出促进了不同国家之间的投资机会、经济合作和文化交流，具有改变现有全球经济环境的巨大潜力。不过，在"一带一路"投资过程中，将需要投入大量的时间和精力来解决政府、国有企业和其他投资方之间与法律与合同相关的争议。如果发生争议，国际仲裁仍将是一个具有吸引力的争议解决方式。因此，选择一个良好的法律环境、仲裁机构以及具备专业知识和丰富经验的仲裁员，从长远角度来看，这将有助于投资者获得更为理想的投资结果。因而，以仲裁方式解决争议与选择香港作为仲裁地，有望成为各投资企业与组织考虑争议解决方式时的首选。

注：