International investment law and arbitration

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laird Ian A ◽  
Sabahi Borzu ◽  
Sourgens Frédéric Gilles ◽  
Birch Nicholas J ◽  
Duggal Kabir
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
The Past ◽  
Treatment Standard ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Primary Basis ◽  
Equitable Treatment

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.

Equity-Based Decision-Making and the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard: Lessons From the Argentine Investment Disputes – Part I

2012 ◽  
pp. 210-255
Author(s):  
Srilal M. Perera
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Treatment Standard ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Agreements

In Part I of this two-part article the author examines the foundations for equity-based decision-making under international law and their relevance to resolving contemporary investment disputes based on the Fair and Equitable Treatment standard (FET standard). He contends that equity-based decision-making in the past has been rare, and in such instances adjudicators have been extremely restrained because of the propensity for subjective judgments. However, in the modern day application of equitable considerations in a large number of investments disputes before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) seeking relief based on the FET standard, the decisions have mostly been inconsistent and conflicting, leading often to inexplicable and excessive remedies. In no other line of cases has this trend been more demonstrated than in the investment disputes following the Argentine economic crisis. They point more to the serious anomalies and omissions and interpretive issues in International Investment Agreements (mostly BITs) which require remedial measures if international investment law itself is to advance.

NCD Prevention and International Investment Law in Latin America: Chile’s Experience in Preventing Obesity and Unhealthy Diets

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 781-808
Author(s):  
Marcelo Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
International Investment ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Nutrition Labelling ◽  
Treatment Standard ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Abstract In 2016, Chile became the first country in Latin America to implement comprehensive regulations aimed at preventing obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. It introduced innovative measures including a mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme for food products high in sodium, free sugars, fats, and calories, and strict advertising and marketing restrictions of unhealthy foods to children under 14 years of age. However, food-exporting countries have questioned the lawfulness of these measures in the context of the World Trade Organization’s Technical Barriers to Trade Committee, and multinational food companies have filed several complaints before Chilean courts challenging their implementation. This article provides an overview of specific legal issues discussed in domestic courts and examines Chile’s measures under the rules of international investment law. It assesses whether they would withstand a treaty claim based on indirect expropriation, breach of the national treatment standard, and breach of the fair and equitable treatment standard.

scholarly journals Fair and Equitable Treatment Between the International and National Rule of Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Velimir Živković
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
National Rule ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Abstract Promoting the rule of law is a potentially strong legitimating narrative for international investment law. Illustrating the interlinkage, the ubiquitous ‘fair and equitable treatment’ (FET) standard embodies distinctly rule of law requirements. But these requirements remain open-textured and allow understanding their meaning in either more ‘international’ or ‘national’ way. An ‘international’ understanding – detached from the host State’s vision on how the rule of law should look like – should remain dominant. But I argue that decision-making under the FET standard should also involve a systematic engagement with how these requirements would be understood in the host State’s law and how they were complied with from that perspective. Whilst not determinative for establishing a breach, this assessment better respects the expectations of the parties, strengthens the persuasiveness of findings and helps enhance the national rule of law as a key contributor to the ultimate goal of investment protection – economic development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document