論東道國司法和行政措施對投資保護義務的遵守與違反──英菲尼托黃金公司訴哥斯達黎加案評述

On Compliance and Violation of Investment Protection Obligation by Judicial and Administrative Measure of Host State-A Review of Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Costa Rica

英菲尼托黃金公司訴哥斯達黎加案的實質爭議問題為東道國司法和行政措施是否違反《加拿大——哥斯達黎加雙邊投資協定》項下的公平與公正待遇、全面保護與安全及徵收條款，以及附件Ｉ中的環境例外能否排除被申請人的投資保護責任。仲裁庭在裁決中劃定了公平與公正待遇的標準和要素，界分了全面保護與安全條款的內涵與外延，並推導了司法徵收的證成邏輯與責任豁免。亟待審視仲裁庭的規範分析與結論推導，推演投資協定義務對東道國司法和行政措施的引導與限制。

The substantive issues in Infinitio Gold Ltd. v. Costa Rica were whether the judicial and administrative measures of the host country violated fair and equitable treatment clause, full protection and security clause and expropriation clause under Canada-Cost Rica BIT. Furthermore, whether environmental exceptions provided by Annex I can exempt the Claimant's responsibility to protect investment. The tribunal has defined the criteria and elements of fair and equitable treatment, delimited the connotation and extension of full protection and security, and deduced the justification logic of judicial expropriation and liability exemption. It is urgent to examine the tribunal's normative analysis and conclusion and deduce the guidance and restrictions of the international investment agreements on the judicial and administrative measures of the host state.