General Principles of Law on the Legal Force of Provisional Measures in International Investment Arbitration

2018 ◽  
pp. 21-44
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Legal Force

The Vienna Convention as Authority for the Use of Precedent as Customary Practice in International Arbitrations of Oil Concessions and Investment Disputes in North Africa and the Gulf Arab States; or a Lex Mercatoria for a Lex Petrolea

2013 ◽  
pp. 918-940
Author(s):  
Mary B. Ayad
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Western Law ◽  
Lex Mercatoria

General principles of law are a valid source of law for arbitral tribunals. The Vienna Convention1 allows recourse to general principles of law. In Bilateral Investment Treaty (hereinafter “BIT”) interpretation but also in International Commercial Arbitration (hereinafter “ICA”)/International Investment Arbitration (“hereinafter “IIA”), arbitrators can be guided by the Vienna Convention2 and in so doing may refer to a number of ‘rules’ and norms of ‘international law’ applicable to the relations between states, such as those mentioned herein including principles drawn from the lex mercatoria or other types of international customary law, e.g. the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which honours contracts between states and investors, as well as the principle of precedent. Additionally, they may refer to customary norms from other jurisdictions that can harmonise with Western law.

Requirements for Amicus Curiae Participation in International Investment ArbitrationA Deconstruction of the Procedural Wall Erected in Joint ICSID Cases ARB/10/25 and ARB/10/15

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Schliemann
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Recent Attempt ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Legal Standard ◽  
Investment Law

Abstract The legal standard on amicus curiae participation in international investment arbitration has been forged by the judicial development of legal rules and, in parallel, the modification of normative sources, such as the ICSID Arbitration Rules. Current and future decisions by arbitral tribunals on the participation of amicus curiae in a given dispute must abide by this consolidated standard. In June 2012, the arbitral tribunal in Joint ICSID Cases No. ARB/10/15 and No. ARB/10/25 released a procedural order, rejecting an amicus petition. This Order contains various deviations from the applicable legal standard and severely restricts the options for amicus participation. The recent attempt to strengthen the legitimacy of international investment arbitration by allowing for greater amicus participation and the acknowledgement of the interdependence of investment law and other areas of international law is thereby put in peril.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document