Abstract International investment agreements contain a number of different investorstate dispute settlement clauses ranging from offering a very limited jurisdiction over specific compensation issues to broad options to arbitrate any (contractual or treaty based) investment dispute. Investment arbitration practice has demonstrated that uncertainty about the precise scope of dispute settlement clauses often leads to protracted jurisdictional battles. Reducing this uncertainty by drafting clearer dispute settlement clauses is likely to deter investors from bringing hopeless claims, and states fom raising indefensible jurisdictional objections. A limited set of jurisdictional and procedural obstacles should allow tribunals to deal with the real (substantive) issues of investment law, ie whether and to what extent the standards of investment protection enshrined in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and investment chapters of international investment agreements (HAs) have been complied with or not. This would also serve the primary purpose of investment arbitration as protection of foreign investments.

中文翻译：

---

国际投资协议中投资者与国家争端解决的范围

摘要 国际投资协议包含许多不同的投资者国家争端解决条款，从对特定赔偿问题提供非常有限的管辖权到对任何（基于合同或条约的）投资争端进行仲裁的广泛选择。投资仲裁实践表明，争议解决条款的确切范围的不确定性往往会导致旷日持久的管辖权之争。通过起草更明确的争端解决条款来减少这种不确定性，可能会阻止投资者提出无望的索赔，并且各国可能会提出无可辩驳的管辖权异议。一套有限的司法和程序障碍应允许法庭处理投资法的真实（实质性）问题，即双边投资条约 (BITs) 和国际投资协定 (HAs) 投资章节中规定的投资保护标准是否得到遵守以及在多大程度上得到遵守。这也将服务于投资仲裁作为保护外国投资的主要目的。