International Investment Law: A Journey from the Past to the Future

2020 ◽  
pp. 91-98
Author(s):  
Evgeny Popov
Author(s):  
Valentina Vadi

The dialectic between continuity and change lies at the heart of international law, which seeks to foster peaceful, just, and prosperous relations among nations. International law endeavors to govern the future by applying, in the present, norms that are inherited from the past. Nonetheless, everything flows and in an ever-changing world, some change is needed within the international legal system to ensure its stability especially in time of crisis. Not only can crises constitute means for the development of international law, but they can test, undermine or ultimately buttress the structure of international law. This article explores the connection between crisis, continuity, and change in international investment law and arbitration. It seeks to answer the following question: can international investment law successfully address the challenges posed by the coronavirus crisis? Or will the pandemic change the field of international investment law as we know it? After briefly discussing a range of procedural matters, the article focuses on substantive aspects, namely, the kinds of claims that can be filed, the kind of defences that can be raised, and how arbitral tribunals can adjudicate such matters. In this way, the article ultimately concludes that both continuity and change are necessary for ensuring the health and wealth of nations and justice among them.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmin S

Over the past decades, transnational corporations have come under increasing public scrutiny for their involvement in human rights abuses, particularly in developing countries. One may think of violent acts against local communities, slave labor, and grand scale environmental pollution. International investment law protects and safeguards the rights of foreign investors but falls short of holding them accountable to societies where they operate. Recently, a few arbitral tribunals have grappled with the question of whether corporations can be held accountable for illegalities that constitute human rights violations inflicted upon the host state or its people. This article discusses the arbitral treatment of corporate human rights violations by investment tribunals in three treaty-based cases: Copper Mesa v. Ecuador, Burlington v. Ecuador and Urbaser v. Argentina and draws on recent scholarly work on causation in investor-state arbitration to evaluate their approaches.


Author(s):  
Laird Ian A ◽  
Sabahi Borzu ◽  
Sourgens Frédéric Gilles ◽  
Birch Nicholas J ◽  
Duggal Kabir

This chapter is organized into five sections, focusing on issues addressed by tribunals and courts in 2012 related to Jurisdiction, Merits, Compensation and Non-pecuniary Remedies, Procedure and Annulment, and Enforcement of Awards. Section A discusses the grounds for jurisdictional challenge by respondents. Section B provides a summary review of the merits decisions of the past year, showing that the fair and equitable treatment standard remains a primary basis for the awards of tribunals, with a resurgence of decisions by tribunals accepting that investments were expropriated without compensation. Section C reviews the eight awards in which compensation was granted in 2012. Section D addresses questions of procedure that arose in 2012. Finally, Section E reviews the two International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ad hoc annulment committee decisions of the past year, plus a number of domestic court decisions regarding the enforcement of awards.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan W. Schill ◽  
Heather L. Bray

Abstract Mega-Regionals are transforming and shaping the future of international investment law, concerning both the settlement of investment disputes and the substantive disciplines governing investor-state relations. Focusing on the latter, the present article shows how Mega-Regionals depart from the so far dominant European model of investment protection by going beyond crudely worded post-establishment protections for foreign investment. Instead, Mega-Regionals pursue the twin policy goals of investment liberalization through greater market access commitments and strengthening state control by ensuring host governments sufficient space to regulate in the public interest. In light of these policy goals, and considering the deeper reasons for structural changes to the investment rules in Mega-Regionals, the article argues that the models and conceptual foundations of Mega-Regionals build on prototypes first developed in the context of U.S. and NAFTA investment practices. This suggests that the future of international investment law will be shaped to a considerable extent against the background of U.S. experiences, rather than be forged anew by the mechanics of international diplomacy and negotiation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 414-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Makane Moïse Mbengue ◽  
Stefanie Schacherer

The Pan-African Investment Code (PAIC) is the first continent-wide African model investment treaty elaborated under the auspices of the African Union. The PAIC has been drafted from the perspective of developing and least-developed countries with a view to promote sustainable development. The PAIC contains a number of Africa-specific and innovative features, which presumably makes it today a unique legal instrument. Written in a time where the international investment community is still debating the future of international investment law, this article seeks to present and contextualize this first African model investment treaty. The article highlights the most innovative features of the PAIC, such as the reformulation of traditional investment treaty provisions and the introduction of direct obligations for investors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document