The Role of Regional Courts in the Development of International Investment Law: The Case of NAFTA Chapter 11 Dispute Settlement Framework and ECtHR

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-95
Author(s):  
Collins C. Ajibo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Nafta Chapter 11

AbstractRegional courts have synthesized, articulated, and elucidated certain principles of law that influence the development of international investment law. The contributions of NAFTA Chapter 11 dispute settlement framework and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), in particular, have been outstanding. For instance, NAFTA jurisprudence has guided investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals through influential precedents. Similarly, the doctrine of proportionality and the margin of appreciation doctrine which emerged from the ECtHR jurisprudence have become embedded in international investment law. Indeed, given the unique contributions of regional courts and their rapid proliferation, it can be predicted that they will play even more significant roles in the future development of principles of international investment law. Arguably, such emergent principles should be subjected to a prior scrutiny and filtering by ISDS institutions as a precondition to full incorporation into international investment law to foster their legitimacy and credibility.

Social movements, reframing investment relations, and enhancing the application of human rights norms in international investment law

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Moshe Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Movements ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Public Pressure ◽  
Local Actors ◽  
Investment Law

Abstract The recent moderate trend to increasingly apply human rights law in investment awards is accompanied by certain new investment treaties which include expressed human rights provisions. An analysis of recent investment awards indicates that though there are some ‘winds of change’ in this field, it is equally noticeable that human rights law is far from being mainstreamed in international investment law. Investment arbitration procedural law is also undergoing a process of change, and the new procedural rules tend to enhance public elements in the investment arbitral system. This study is aimed at explaining these recent legal changes, highlighting the role of social movements in reframing investment relations as well as increasing public pressure to apply human rights law. These framing changes concern broadening the frame of investment arbitration (beyond the foreign investor–host state dyad), reversing the perceived balance of power between investors and host states, and zooming-in on local individuals and communities residing in host states. The discussion on factors impeding legal change in this field emphasizes the role of the private legal culture prevalent in the investment arbitration system, which is reflected and reinforced by certain resilient socio-legal frames. Informed by this analysis, the study suggests some legal mechanisms which can mitigate the inter-partes frame, and increase the application of human rights law in investment arbitration; inter alia, rigorous transparency rules that are likely to facilitate increased public pressure on tribunals and increase the participation of social movements representing local actors in arbitral processes.

International Law and Foreign Investment in Hydroelectric Industry: A Multidimensional Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 183-222
Author(s):  
Attila Tanzi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Multidimensional Analysis ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Domestic Law

The main focus of the present article is on the entanglement between four bodies of international law sensitive to foreign investment in the creation and/or operation hydroelectric industry: i.e. international investment law, human rights law, international water law and private international law to the extent that public international law rules on conflict of laws on civil liability for transboundary damage are concerned. This horizontal approach to the analysis is supplemented by a vertical one looking at the interactions between international and domestic law. Consideration of the different bodies of international law in question is associated to that of the adjudicative, and non-adjudicative, means of dispute settlement available under each such bodies of law. On that score, the role of the foreign investor in a litigation scenery will be considered, primarily as claimant, but also, prospectively, in relation to the situation in the State hosting the investment is, or may become, respondent in inter-State litigation.

scholarly journals Regulatory autonomy and regulatory chill in Opinion 1/17

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens Ankersmit
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

This article analyses the aspect of the Court’s reasoning in Opinion 1/17 that focuses on the regulatory autonomy of the Parties to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) to decide on levels of protection of public interests. The European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) introduction of regulatory autonomy under EU law coincides with the wider debate around ‘regulatory chill’ under international investment law. This article finds the ECJ’s concept of regulatory autonomy to be narrower than that of the regulatory chill hypothesis put forward by critics of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). It further analyses the ECJ’s reasoning that the CETA’s investment tribunals do not have jurisdiction to call into question the levels of protection sought by the EU. In so doing, it will critically evaluate the certainty of the ECJ’s promise that there will be no negative effect on public interest decision-making through CETA’s investment chapter. Finally, it will explore the legal consequences of Opinion 1/17 for future awards and investment agreements.

scholarly journals Green Shoots in a Barren World: Recent Developments in International Investment Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-471
Author(s):  
Jason Rudall
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Good Investment ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Multiple Challenges ◽  
The Right ◽  
Law Making

AbstractThis article begins from the observation that there have been a number of developments in international investment law-making and the jurisprudence of investor-state dispute settlement tribunals involving the protection of the environment and human rights. As for law-making, this article explores the evolving substance of international investment agreements as well as regulatory developments in the area of business and human rights that are of relevance to the international investment law framework. The article then turns to consider the emergence of human rights and environmental issues in the recent jurisprudence of investment tribunals and appraises how such issues have been dealt with—both in procedural and substantive terms—by arbitral tribunals. Finally, it questions whether investment tribunals are appropriate venues for the adjudication of non-investment matters like environmental and human rights issues, and highlights best practices that could be adopted by future tribunals. Overall, the article concludes that the piecemeal approach adopted to date provides a step in the right direction but is ultimately inadequate given the multiple challenges that our planet currently faces. Rather, a more ambitious agenda that is concerned with promoting good investment, as opposed to mitigating bad practices, should be pursued.

scholarly journals Protection of Property Rights in Crimea: The Tools of International Investment Law compared to the Mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-146
Author(s):  
Maren Krimmer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
International Investment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Foreign Direct Investments ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Occupied Territory ◽  
Investment Law

Abstract The Crimean conflict has been a challenge to the international community not only politically since the role of international law has now been questioned, especially concerning its interpretation and even applicability. As Crimea now falls into the category of an annexed/occupied territory, it is worth examining whether effective protection is afforded to property rights relating to foreign direct investments (fdi s) on Crimean territory. Foreign Direct Investments are usually protected by bilateral investment treaties (bit s) and this paper examines whether the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee an effective protection for property and also what other tools may exist for guarantee this protection. The article shows that there are two different “toolkits” which can protect investors’ property rights. Thus, not only the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee effective protection of property protection but also another tool, which is the European Convention on Human Rights. Both tools, the Russia-Ukraine bit and the echr protect the property rights and can co-exist.

The Role of International Investment Law in the Business and Human Rights Legal Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-55
Author(s):  
Ludovica Chiussi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

Abstract This article examines the interplay between international investment law and international human rights law in order to assess whether the former can be used to foster corporate accountability for violations of human rights. The role of international investment agreements in ensuring corporate compliance with human rights will be addressed, together with the approach to human rights violations of corporations by international investment tribunals. Whilst acknowledging some inherent limits of IIL, the underling argument of the paper is that rebalancing rights and obligations of investors may give teeth to corporate human rights accountability, while also benefitting the legitimacy of IIL.

scholarly journals EU Law in investment arbitration: a view from international arbitral tribunals

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katariina Särkänne
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Legal Regimes ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
The Relationship

The conflict between international investment law and EU law provides fruitful insights into how the arbitral tribunals, acting outside the EU’s judicial system, have viewed the EU and EU law. Taking as an example the topical questions of the principle of autonomy of EU law as well as the EU’s State aid rules in investor-State arbitration, the article discusses how arbitral tribunals have seen the role of EU law and how they have treated the opposite demands from the two legal regimes. The claim of EU law rendering the intra-EU investment treaties invalid has constantly proved unsuccessful, and the tribunals have maintained their jurisdiction to be based on international law. However, the possibility of EU law affecting the assessment of the merits of the cases is clearer and more accepted. While harmonious interpretation could somewhat alleviate the remaining conflicts between the two legal regimes, it is unlikely that either regime would compromise the core elements of their systems. The article argues that, for the specific nature of the EU’s legal order to be secured in a way that does not conflict with international law, the relationship between EU law, international (investment) law and investment dispute settlement should be clearly regulated in instruments of international law.

scholarly journals The Role of Proportionality in International Investment Law and Arbitration: A System-Specific Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 89 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 471-491
Author(s):  
Eric De Brabandere ◽  
Paula Baldini Miranda da Cruz
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Uniform Approach ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

Abstract In this article, we examine the place of proportionality and related tests in international investment law and arbitration by looking specifically at the challenges faced by this field on applying proportionality coherently and consistently. We also assess where proportionality has been used in international investment law and arbitration. We argue that a sound appreciation of proportionality in international investment law requires taking into account the inherently imbalanced conception of international investment agreements, the incoherence of the international investment law regime, and the ad hoc dispute settlement method tasked with applying and interpreting a variety of imprecise and diverging norms. Therefore, international investment law and arbitration have not developed an institutionalised approach towards proportionality. Since investment agreements and international investment arbitration form a rather incoherent collective of cases and, as a result, have not developed a single or uniform approach towards proportionality, there is a tendency to individually approach cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document