Investment Arbitration Under the Energy Charter Treaty - From Dispute Settlement to Treaty Implementation

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. W. Walde
Author(s):  
Parra Antonio R

This chapter examines activities of the Centre from the start of 2011 to the end of June 2015. Almost 50 percent more cases were registered at ICSID in that period compared to the previous five years. The chapter provides some statistics on the cases of this period. As in the decade before, it shows, most the cases were brought to ICSID on the basis of the dispute settlement provisions of investment treaties, mostly bilateral investment treaties (BITs) (in over 60 percent of the cases). A large proportion of the cases (more than ten percent) came to ICSID under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Cases submitted to the Centre pursuant to the dispute resolution clauses of investment contracts made up for a smaller share of the total. A handful (5 percent) of the cases were initiated under dispute settlement provisions of an investment law of the host State. The chapter then looks at institutional developments of ICSID during the period and considers new challenges that ICSID might meet in the future.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 425-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cees Verburg

Abstract The Energy Charter Treaty is a multilateral trade and investment agreement that is currently the most often-invoked investment agreement worldwide. A review of the case law under the treaty shows that its provisions have been interpreted and applied inconsistently by arbitral tribunals and domestic courts. Considering the financial and reputational consequences of investment arbitration for both the investor and the State, a lack of ‘legal certainty’ adversely affects all parties involved. This article identifies various inconsistencies, some of the causes, and proposes solutions that could enhance legal certainty in investor-State dispute settlement under the treaty. This is a timely contribution as the Energy Charter Conference has recently taken the first steps to modernise the treaty by approving a list of topics for reform, and is now considering tools to implement future reform measures.


Author(s):  
Manu Sanan

This article is a preface to India’s first engagement with investor-state dispute settlement – White Industries v. Republic of India. Notwithstanding its systemic implications at various levels, the award has left a denting comment on the functioning of the Indian judiciary – the workings of which were a principle point of challenge. The current piece attempts to trace the delicate line defining India’s investment obligations, the functioning of its courts and the extant relation between ‘denial of justice’ and ‘effective means’ as under India’s bilateral investment obligations. The article is divided into three principal sections – the first introduces India’s experience with investment arbitration and its bilateral investment agenda, the second is a contextual overview of acknowledged global standards of protection under transnational law and third discusses the White Industries arbitration - analyzing the legal contest therein and its outcome.


Author(s):  
Hobér Kaj

This chapter provides an overview of the Energy Charter Treaty. Developed on the basis of the European Energy Charter of 1991, the Energy Charter Treaty is a multilateral treaty dealing with inter-governmental co-operation in the energy sector. It covers five broad areas in the energy sector: trade; investment protection; transit; environmental protection and energy efficiency; and settlement of disputes. The trade provisions of the Treaty were designed to import fundamental GATT principles, such as non-discrimination, national treatment, most-favoured-nation treatment, and transparency. The provisions on investment protection are found in Part III of the Treaty. In particular, Article 13 in Part III deals with expropriation, while Article 10 deals with various standards of treatment of foreign investments. The rules for facilitating transit of energy through the participating States are laid down in Article 7. The transit regime is based on freedom of transit and the principle of non-discrimination. Meanwhile, Article 19 of the ECT sets forth a number of ‘best efforts’ obligations of the Contracting Parties with respect to environmental protection and energy efficiency. Lastly, the ECT includes two binding dispute settlement mechanisms: investor-State arbitration for investment disputes (Article 26) and state-to-state arbitration for basically all disputes that may arise under the ECT (Article 27), with the exception for disputes concerning competition (Article 6(7)) and environment (Article 27(2)). The chapter then looks at the Energy Charter Conference, an inter-governmental organization established by the ECT and the governing and decision-making body for the Energy Charter Process.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 251-299
Author(s):  
Gabriel Bottini ◽  
Catharine Titi ◽  
Facundo Pérez Aznar ◽  
Julien Chaisse ◽  
Marko Jovanovic ◽  
...  

Abstract In the era of the backlash against investor-State dispute settlement, the costs of proceedings have been a prime object of criticism. This article examines the problem of excessive costs and insufficient recoverability of costs awards. Firstly, it examines the issue of excessive costs in relation to both party costs (fees and expenses of counsel, experts, and witnesses) and tribunal costs (fees and expenses of arbitrators and arbitral institutions). Secondly, it discusses the impact of the length of proceedings on costs. Thirdly, it discusses the contribution of third-party funding to excessive costs. Finally, it analyses the issue of insufficient recoverability of costs awards and the availability of mechanisms to secure prompt payment of costs awards where there are insufficient resources or an unwillingness to pay. In examining each of these concerns, this article assesses the potential contribution of four different models for reform of investment arbitration.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 781-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Lam ◽  
Güneş Ünüvar

AbstractThis article scrutinizes the investment chapters in the new EU Free Trade Agreements from a transparency perspective. The article examines the claims that the dispute settlement mechanisms in the new treaties are sufficiently participatory and more transparent than their predecessors. Procedural standards related to confidentiality of proceedings shall be analysed in the context of existing transparency safeguards in investment arbitration. In addition to procedural guarantees of transparency, the article examines relevant substantive rules affecting participatory aspects of dispute settlement. Furthermore, the article discusses forum-shopping strategies of the parties in the field of investment-related disputes, including internal forum-shopping and parallel proceedings using different procedural mechanisms. In this context, lessons from other fields such as international commercial arbitration related to transparency (in cases in which public interest is present) are highlighted. The proposal for the establishment of an integrated, multilateral court for investment cases is also invoked.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document