A study on denial of benefits clause in international investment arbitration

Abstract

오늘날 일부 국제투자협정은 적용대상 투자 및 투자자의 범위를 포괄적으로 규정하면서, 특정 범주의 투자자를 그 적용범위에서 배제하는 소위 혜택부인조항을 두고 있다. 이는 협정의 체약국과 일정한 관련이 없는 투자자에 대하여 협정의 보호를 배제하는 취지의 규정이다. 즉, 혜택부인조항은 투자자가 실질적인 투자 활동 없이, 오직 투자중재의 관할권을 획득할 목적으로 지배구조를 개편하여 유리한 협정의 보호를 원용하려는 소위 협정쇼핑과 같은 절차남용적 행위를 차단하는 역할을 할 수 있다. 본고는 중재판정사례를 통하여 혜택부인조항의 적용요건과 방식 및 효과를 분석하였다. 이를 통해 투자중재에서 노출된 문제, 예컨대 투자협정의 불분명한 조문을 명확히 하여 중재판정부의 자의적인 해석이 개입되지 않도록 하는 한편, 이것이 투자협정의 보편적인 규정으로 정립하는데 따른 정책적 시사점을 제시한다.Denial of benefits clause in international investment treaties is generally designed to exclude from treaty protection nationals of third States who seek to benefit from provisions that the State parties to the treaty did not intend to grant them. This clause allows a State party to deny the benefits of the treaty to investors that lack a sufficient connection to the treaty party in which they are incorporated. Thus, it prevents the third country nationals who own or control the investor from gaining access to treaty protection when they would otherwise not benefit from such protection due to their nationality. With respect to the procedural requirements of the denial of benefits clause, arbitral tribunals have consistently required that a State must affirmatively exercise its right to deny benefits to an investor. Once a State exercises its right to deny the treaty protection, it remains to be answered whether it affects the tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear the claim, or only the substantive provision under a treaty. This turns on the wording and scope of the provision in question. Denial of benefits clause is an important too by which State parties can achieve a policy of excluding certain investors from the benefits of investment treaties. However, efforts should be made to treaty drafting in order to ensure that investors falling within the scope of a denial of benefits clause and the procedural requirement for invoking the clause are clearly defined in order for this policy to be achieved.