“MOOT Partners”专栏邀请本届大赛的赞助支持律所供稿，分享赛事评价、裁判感言、实务心得等精彩内容。本期推送的文章由FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021高级支持律所汇仲律师事务所供稿，文内更有“实习福利”放送，请仔细阅读，不要错过绝佳的实践机会哦！

今年，汇仲作为高级支持律所积极协助深圳国际仲裁院（SCIA）举办FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021，多名汇仲律师积极参与了各项活动。费宁律师、杨雪瑜律师和钟莉律师作为主讲人举办了题为“湾区扬帆正当时—中国投资者视角下的国际投资仲裁”的Moot Webinar并且担任了FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021积分赛、决赛的裁判。杨雪瑜律师和黄泽宇律师为FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021撰写并发表了题为“Protected ‘Investor’ and ‘Investment’ - A Perspective from the Greater Bay Area”（《粤港澳大湾区视角下受保护的适格“投资者”及其“投资”》）的英文学术文章。

作为赛后总结，我们通过倾听三位汇仲合伙人的赛后感言和心得走近汇仲，零距离感受国际投资仲裁独有的挑战与魅力。

与国际商事仲裁相比，国际投资仲裁在国际仲裁领域实际上是一个“小圈子”，分圈内和圈外两个层面，在投资仲裁圈内的大部分仲裁员和律师又分为代表投资者和代表东道国两个阵营。中国仲裁圈接触投资仲裁这个“小圈子”是在过去不到十年的时间里发生的事情。我国律师、仲裁员和青年法律从业者未来如何 “破圈”从而真正进入国际投资仲裁领域是当下值得思考的一个实践课题。我很开心通过参与深圳国际仲裁院（SCIA）举办的FDI Moot Shenzhen赛事活动看到了方向和希望，相信国际投资仲裁青年法律人才储备计划必将是重中之重，意义深远。

客观地讲，与一线国际大所相比，中国律师事务所在国际仲裁领域目前还是存在一定的差距。在进入投资仲裁领域的初期阶段，中国代理律师一般在国际律师团队中扮演辅助角色，比如出具与中国法相关的法律意见书、担任专家证人或者从事其他辅助性工作。然而，结合汇仲代理多起投资仲裁案件的实践经验，我认为中国律师完全有机会并且有能力在投资仲裁领域“变辅为主”。首先，拥有国际投资仲裁实战经验的中国律师能够根据投资争议类型和具体案情帮助包括中国公民和企业在内的适格投资者在全球范围内寻找最合适的国际合作律师。第二，中国代理律师和国际合作律师在经过通盘考量之后，能够为当事人确定最合适的仲裁员人选。第三，有丰富涉外实务经验的中国代理律师可以代理中国投资者与国际律师事务所和第三方资助提供者进行费用安排上的谈判，帮助我国投资者控制投入投资仲裁的费用成本。最后，中国代理律师有权代表中国投资者对国际合作律师在推进仲裁程序方面及时作出指示，迅速推进仲裁程序，全面审阅、修改国际律所提交的所有文件，并且代表中国投资者与国际合作律师对案件进行有针对性的专业讨论。在以上几个方面，中国代理律师扮演的角色是中国投资者在国际投资仲裁案件中最大限度地维护投资者合法权益的首席代表，为受BIT和其他国际投资条约保护的中国投资者提供国际律所无法提供的全流程式、贴心舒适的法律服务。

总而言之，国际投资仲裁对中国律师和青年法律学子而言是一片待开拓的星辰大海，期待我们国家能涌现出更多的优秀涉外法律人才，代表中国投资者走向国际投资仲裁的舞台，发出中国声音，展现中国力量。

FDI Moot Shenzhen赛事圆满落下帷幕。很高兴作为汇仲的一员深度参与到赛事中，见证了主办方高水准的组织能力和选手们的精彩表现。

汇仲是在国际投资仲裁领域有实战经验的、极少数的几家中国律所之一。我们目前正在处理几起国际投资仲裁案件（包括已经进入仲裁程序的，和将要进入仲裁程序的）。我自己的亲身体会是，国际投资仲裁很小众，但却离我们并不远；假以时日，中国律师在国际投资仲裁领域是大有可为的。

国际投资仲裁充满魅力。进入国际投资仲裁的案件通常是非常复杂的，投资者通常已经用尽了东道国可能的法律救济但仍然无法实现预期的目标。国际投资仲裁为这些复杂的、高难度的案件提供了争议解决的另一种维度。作为律师，能够在这些复杂的事实和法律关系中抽丝剥茧，为投资者找到解决争议的路径，无疑是最令人欣喜的事情。

国际投资仲裁的复杂性也决定了它是极具挑战的。优秀的书面和口头英语表达能力是必须具备的基本素质。除此之外，它要求律师具备很高的事实梳理能力，在掌握国内部门法的基础上更要具有扎实的国际投资法知识和储备，并在国内法和国际投资法之间搭起桥梁。

本届FDI Moot Shenzhen赛事涌现了不少好苗子，希望大家继续打磨自己的能力，未来在这样一个充满魅力和挑战的领域展露风采！

Amid the Covid-19 pandemic, the successful organization of the FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021 by the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (SCIA) is very impressive. I understand all hearing sessions were accompanied with SCIA moderator, with dedicated IT support from Hong Kong, with breakout room for arbitrators, and with online scoring system that is quite convenient and efficient. The SCIA has equipped the arbitration moot competition with rather advanced and excellent virtual hearing facilities. In the meantime, the bench brief was well prepared, and the arbitrators involved in the moot competition were impressively diversified in terms of jurisdiction, gender, background, and age. I sat in a panel with a colleague from Singapore and another from India, and I also saw an arbitrator from Washington D.C. who used to be my colleague at Dechert LLP. The SCIA FDI Moot has effectively gathered the international arbitration community and drawn their attention to arbitration education in China.  

From my personal perspective of an arbitrator serving one session of the FDI Moot Shenzhen 2021, I think the tribunal in the Moot is much more accommodating than arbitrators in real life. The moot arbitrators are more patient, more tolerant, and they would incline to allow the students to fully deliver their case, in the meantime, be mindful of fairly allocating questions to each participant. However, in real life, the tribunal would focus their attention on clearly understanding the case, the relevant facts, and the arguments of each party, hence would incline to stop counsel and seek answers where needed. The tribunal would not be too concerned about treating each counsel with equal number of questions.

Real life tribunal would also not tolerate counsel simply reading from the script, although reference to one’s note from time to time is considered normal. 

In real life, counsel often has their own case “map”, which structures their hearing strategy and directs their presentation depending on contingent factors such as the frequency of interruption by the tribunal, the interest of the tribunal on specific issues as shown by their questions, the remaining time for their presentation, etc. A real-life counsel would not be thrown off their case simply because the tribunal puts too many questions to him/her, focuses on one or two issues, and/or leaves him/her no time to complete his case theory. 

Therefore, moot participants should reasonably except that real-life hearing is much more challenging than the moot competition. Advocacy is surely an art that can only be mastered over practice. On top of that, thorough preparation of and familiarity with one’s case is a fundamental requirement.  

Currently, we are representing two Chinese national investors from the Shenzhen City in an ICSID proceedings against a State in Southeast Asia. The investor-State dispute concerns the overseas investments made by the Chinese nationals in the telecommunications sector. We believe this is the very first investor-State arbitration initiated by Chinese natural persons domiciled in the Guangdong Province against a host State.  

In terms of the qualifications of lawyers in investment arbitration field, I believe one must have a good grasp of international investment law and familiarity with the investment dispute resolution mechanism, including the ICSID and UNCITRAL arbitration rules and practice. One should also master English language, and possess good lawyer skills including communication, written and oral advocacy, legal research, etc.   

Frankly speaking, China still has a long way to go in terms of becoming an investment arbitration hub. The amendment of the Chinese Arbitration Law is certainly an encouraging and important step towards this goal. 

As an arbitration practitioner, I am very glad to see, and quite encouraged by the creation of the International Investment Joint Arbitration Center in Shenzhen and SCIA hosting the FDI Moot Shenzhen.