Part I Investment Treaties and the Settlement of Investment Disputes: The Framework, 4 The Role of Precedent in Investment Treaty Arbitration

Author(s):  
Paulsson Jan

This chapter examines the role of precedent in investment treaty arbitration. The technical rules of precedent are practice rules developed within legal systems. A system that enforces the rule of precedent requires a supreme court authorised both to impose a rule on inferior courts and to modify it when it sees fit. However, there is nothing like it in the international realm, and even less so in the context of arbitration. Nonetheless, it is possible to imagine the development of an international ‘law on investment protection’ by something akin to the common-law process of developing authoritative rules by case-by-case accretion, though this type of precedent must be qualified by the word ‘persuasive’ rather than ‘binding’.

2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 905-933
Author(s):  
Jarrod Hepburn

AbstractThe UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts have appeared in a small but steady trickle of investment treaty arbitrations over the last decade. This article considers the use of the Principles by investment tribunals on questions of both domestic law and international law. It suggests that reference to the Principles can play an important legitimating role on questions of domestic law, but that this should not replace reference to the applicable law. On questions of international law, reference to the Principles may be justified by resort to the general principles of law. However, the article contends that there is only a limited role for the UNIDROIT Principles where the primary and secondary rules of investment protection are already found in treaties and custom. In addition, while general principles have historically been drawn from domestic private law, there is increasing recognition that general principles of public law are more relevant to investment arbitration. Given this, arbitrators resolving questions of international law must be cautious in references to the UNIDROIT Principles, a quintessentially private law instrument.


1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Keith

The Right Honourable Sir Kenneth Keith was the fourth speaker at the NZ Institute of International Affairs Seminar. In this article he describes and reflects upon the role of courts and judges in relation to the advancement of human rights, an issue covered in K J Keith (ed) Essays on Human Rights (Sweet and Maxwell, Wellington, 1968). The article is divided into two parts. The first part discusses international lawmakers attempting to protect individual groups of people from 1648 to 1948, including religious minorities and foreign traders, slaves, aboriginal natives, victims of armed conflict, and workers. The second part discusses how from 1945 to 1948, there was a shift in international law to universal protection. The author notes that while treaties are not part of domestic law, they may have a constitutional role, be relevant in determining the common law, give content to the words of a statute, help interpret legislation which is in line with a treaty, help interpret legislation which is designed to give general effect to a treaty (but which is silent on the particular matter), and help interpret and affect the operation of legislation to which the international text has no apparent direct relation. 


2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kenny

AbstractThe common law rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments were radically reformulated by the Canadian Supreme Court in Beals v Saldanha. Few other common law jurisdictions have considered whether or not to follow Canada in this development in private International Law. In 2012, the Irish Supreme Court definitively rejected the Canadian approach. This note examines the judgment in that case, and assesses the reasoning of the Irish Court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 412-425
Author(s):  
Gaurav Sharma

Recent years have witnessed a number of counterclaims by State parties in investment treaty arbitrations based on environmental concerns and the need to protect local resources and safeguard the associated human rights of local communities. This article charts the development of the case law in this context, starting with the Urbaser v. Argentina award of December 2016, before examining its impact on the cases that followed in its wake, notably including the respective 2017 and 2018 awards in Burlington v. Ecuador and Aven v. Costa Rica. It concludes by considering whether these recent cases mark the beginning of a new era of international law claims which finds a parallel in the broader paradigm shift in public discourse on the critical role of all stakeholders in the conservation of the environment, and which may one day result in investors facing standalone claims as the respondent in future investment treaty claims brought by States.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon O'Byrne ◽  
Ronnie Cohen

This article explores the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2014 decision in Bhasin v. Hrynew. This includes an assessment of the new duty of honesty in contractual performance and the newly identified organizing principle of good faith. The authors also discuss contracting out of the duty of honesty — which Bhasin itself raises as a possibility — by assessing both Canadian and American law on point, including the Uniform Commercial Code. The article concludes that Bhasin’s largest and most lasting contribution is likely in how it expressly legitimates and defends the role of good faith in the common law of contract.


Author(s):  
El Far Ahmed

This chapter discusses the principle of abuse of rights and its application in national legal systems and in international law. To determine if abuse of rights constitutes a general principle of law, its recognition must first be examined in the different legal systems in order to establish its generality and then subsequently one must distil the concept to its essential elements. This is necessary to determine if there is a need to modify its conditions of application in order to make it suitable for the particularities of international arbitration. The chapter then looks at the application of the principle in civil legal systems: mainly in French law, German law, Swiss law, Louisiana Law, and Egyptian law. It also considers the recognition, or lack thereof, of abuse of rights in the common law legal systems and in international law. The omnipresence of the principle of abuse of rights in civil legal systems is evident. However, the ubiquity of the principle does not necessarily reflect a uniform legal basis of the principle’s existence, or a uniform method of how it is utilized to prevent an abuse of right.


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein Ahmed Tura

The Ethiopian legal system has transplanted substantial elements from both Continental Law and Common Law legal systems. While the legal system is characterized by its reception of substantial rules from the Continental Law Legal System, there are some concepts transplanted from the Common Law legal system particularly incorporated in the procedural laws. Moreover, under Proclamation No. 454/2005, the interpretation of laws by the Cassation Division of the Federal Supreme Court (hereinafter Cassation Division) is made to have binding authority on all lower courts at all levels in the entire country. Although the Proclamation seems to introduce the doctrine of precedent, there is a debate as to whether what is introduced under the Proclamation amounts to a precedent system or not. Moreover, it is not expressly given whether judicial organs other than regular courts such as administrative agencies or tribunals, religious and customary courts are bound by the decision of the Cassation Division. The Proclamation also does not provide for the effects of overruling and preconditions to overrule previous decisions of the Cassation Division. The purpose of this article is to critically analyze the legal effects of the binding interpretation of law given at cassation by the Federal Supreme Court in the Ethiopian legal system.


2002 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Polden

Views about the nature and extent of the “fusion” effected by the Judicature Acts frequently focus narrowly on those cases which determined the doctrinal position, with insufficient regard for the accompanying changes to practice, procedure and structures.This article examines the means by which the promoters of the legislation and other interested parties sought to promote or restrain its formidable fusionist potential. It explores the use of cross-jurisdictional appointments to infuse equity into the common law divisions; the successive changes to the membership and working arrangements of the court of appeal; and the short-lived experiment of sending Chancery and appellate judges on circuit. It suggests that a more detailed examination of the effect of these structures and the role of individual judges of the Supreme Court of Judicature in its formative years is needed for a full understanding of the limited fusion that emerged.


Author(s):  
Joost Blom

This article examines the choice of law methods developed in four legal systems for problems relating to the substantial or essential validity of contracts. The complicated questions of formation and capacity have had to be left aside. The first two parts of this article discussed the choice of law methods used by courts in France, Germany, and the United States. This concluding part deals with the law in England and the common law jurisdictions in Canada, and also, by way of epilogue, with the recently completed European Communities Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations. Finally, some general conclusions will be offered about the patterns of law that have emerged in the course of this survey.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document