Ethyl诉加拿大政府案例下评析MIA之困境

Ethyl诉加拿大政府案例下评析MIA之困境

By袁利民，王倩倩1.CaseName：EthylCorporationvs.Canada2.Facts：InApril1997,theCanadianGovernmentbannedtheinter-provincialtransportandinternationalimportofMMTbecauseofhealthconcerns.EthylCorporation,themakerofMMT,contestedthisbanunderNAFTA.3.Issue：ShouldCanadarescindtheMMTbanandpayEthyl？EthylCorporationvs.Canada4.Decition：CanadarescindtheMMTban,payEthylinexcessof$19million,andtaketheunprecedentedstepofissuingastatementthatMMTwasneitheranenvironmentalnorhealthrisk.EthylCorporationvs.Canada(4a) RULE：NAFTAChapterElevenArticle1102:NationalTreatmentArticle1106:PerformanceRequirementsArticle1110:ExpropriationandCompensationEthylCorporationvs.Canada(4b) APPLICATION-NAFTAArticle1102:thebanwasaviolationofrulesrequiringnationaltreatmentforforeigninvestorsbecauseitbannedimports,butnotlocalproduction-NAFTAArticle1106:thebanwasa“performancerequirement〞forbiddenunderthisarticle,becauseitwouldeffectivelyrequireEthyltobuildafactoryineveryCanadianprovincetocomplywiththetransportbanandmakeanMMTinvestmentinCanada.EthylCorporationvs.Canada-NAFTAArticle1110:CanadianMMTbandecreasedthefuturesalesandstainedthereputationwhichamountedtoaNAFTA-forbiddenexpropriationofitsassets-CanadaconsidersMMTtobeadangeroustoxinbecausethemanganeseinMMTemissionsposesasignificantpublichealthriskinhumans.However,thereisnotenoughscientificevidencetosupportMMT’snegativehealtheffects.EthylCorporationvs.Canada(4c) CONCLUSIONCanadashouldrescindtheMMTban,andpayEthyl.NAFTA和MAI之共同困境1.投资者诉国家争端解决机制2.出于人类健康和环境保护的“征收〞不得“滥用〞3.挑战国家相关立法主权建议1.对投