Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the remedies available under Iranian investment treaties for settlement of investment disputes. This includes the obligation of the Iranian Government to provide foreign investors access to international arbitration. The sensitivity of the controversial Iranian nuclear program and the imposition of economic and financial sanctions on Iran will lead to the termination of many contracts between companies from Europe and the West and Iran, therefore, a viable solution must exist to address the rights and remedies of foreign investors. This article aims to provide an insight into Iranian treaties.

The main method was a survey of different treaties signed by Iran.

The discussion revealed that there are currently more than 50 treaties signed and ratified by Iran which provide arbitration as a dispute resolution forum. There are many treaties between the member countries of the European Union which make it important for the research. Iranian treaties guarantee international law remedies to foreign companies with investment in Iran by allowing them to seek redress in an international forum.

Iran has not signed the ICS1D Convention, meaning that the arbitration proceedings will be subject to ad hoc arbitration rules of UNCITRAL. Furthermore, ICSID rules on enforcement of the award do not apply. Therefore, the winning party must go through the Iranian courts to enforce its awards.

The value of the paper is to government organization, international institutions and multinational companies with substantial economic interest in Iranian energy and natural resources. For the first time, the topic has been covered in a research paper. There are no articles in Iranian bilateral investment treaties (BITs) addressing dispute resolution through arbitration. This is the first piece of work that actually conducted a thorough analysis of Iranian BITs.

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it identifies the latest trends in investment treaty making and determines the degree to which these trends affect the regulatory space of nation states. Second, it situates the conflict between investment protection and national sovereignty on the level of investment treaties within the wider theoretical framework of the debate between neoliberalism and neorealism in the field of international relations.

This research paper uses qualitative content analysis of international investment treaties with the aim of comparing a sample of new investment treaties with a sample of treaties from a previous generation.

The findings of the paper indicate that the language of investment treaties signed recently tends to promote greater regulatory space for the nation states compared to previous generation of treaties. However, the analysis also suggests that the changes still offer significant leeway to investment tribunals in interpreting the new treaty language, which could mean that the move towards greater national sovereignty in international investment law will not be as significant as many suggest.

Originality of the paper consists mainly in explicit connection it makes between international investment law and the debate between neorealism and neoliberalism in international relations theory.

International investment law has become a powerful tool of global economic governance. With its global network of international investment treaties and effective arbitration mechanism, it has made an extraordinary leap from a relatively niche and underrated area of international law to one of the most prominent legal regimes. This paper aims to illustrate how the evolutionary trajectories of globalization and international investment law have been intertwined.

This paper follows the historical unfolding of international investment law against the background of the globalization phenomenon, tracing the history of globalization processes since the expansion of European interests and export of capital and the onset of the international investment legal framework.

The evolution of globalization and international investment law has always been intertwined and co-dependent, experiencing similar phases of acceleration, transformation, adjustment and progress. This paper finds that the current era of globalization is characterized by an increasing complexity and diversity of transnational interests and global connections; this is also true for international investment law, which is undergoing changes aimed at including wider contexts and interests in international investment relations.

The analysis contributes to a more holistic understanding of the interdependence of these two phenomena, helping to explain how international investment law has become such a powerful, globally recognized and applied legal regime.

Over the past two decades, the application of most-favoured-nation (MFN) clauses in international investment agreements (IIAs) to dispute settlement matters has generated controversy. The purpose of this paper is to help resolve some of the controversies by examining the rule of law issues that may arise from such application of MFN.

The study describes controversies regarding the application of MFN to dispute settlement as per the extant literature on the subject. It explores the elements of rule of law in investor-state arbitration. The paper then analyses the implications of applying MFN to dispute settlement matters for the elements of rule of law. Based on such analysis, the study argues that the application of MFN to dispute settlement matters undermines certain elements of rule of law.

The paper has outlined the relevant elements of rule of law in investor-state arbitration as access to dispute settlement; judicial (or tribunal) independence, fairness and impartiality; consistency and predictability of law and decisions; transparency; accountability and subjection of dispute forums and systems to law. It found that the application of MFN undermines various components of rule of law, in particular of consistency and predictability and the requirement of tribunals to adjudicate within the limits of the law.

The findings of this study will help future investor-state arbitral tribunals to decide on the application of MFN to dispute settlement matters.

The study aims to focus on the effectiveness of international investment agreements (IIAs) in helping or facilitating the influx of foreign direct investment (FDI) to host developing countries.

To critically examine the topic, the black letter approach and the socio-legal analysis are adopted. The study has analysed how Mauritius, being a developing country, is responding to FDI needs from various bilateral and multilateral investment treaties concluded, and the research includes the analysis of official data publicly made available by the World Trade Organization, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, International Monetary Fund and Mauritius governmental agencies’ reports.

From the methodologies used, it was found that other than IIAs, there are various key determinants which foreign investors consider prior to injecting their capital in developing countries in terms of environmental, social and cultural factors. Also, there are some inherent loopholes mostly in terms of monitoring, in the way IIAs are concluded and are applied in practice by and amongst signatory states.

This research is amongst the first studies to conclude the link between IIAs and FDI flows in developing countries with a particular focus on Mauritius. Additionally, an overwhelming number of studies have emphasised on the efforts to boost FDI, which are inspired mostly by action plans of developed nations, but this research will analyse the policy options adopted by China, being itself a developing country, and the extent to which such recommendations are applicable in the context of Mauritius will also be considered.

This chapter seeks to reveal what are the implications of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) debate on international investment law by focusing on the specific example of public health. The right to health is one of the human rights secured in international law and in the national legislation of a majority of States. This chapter will provide examples of investment cases concerning tobacco control measures, imposed by the Host States for the purpose of improving public health, though challenged by the tobacco companies under International Investment Agreements (IIAs) in investment tribunals. These specific examples cast rather general questions regarding the legal framework of international investment framework and its role in providing sufficient policy space for Host States to implement the public policies and to ensure that foreign companies adhere to the CSR standards.

In order to investigate what are the implications of the CSR debate on international investment law on the example of tobacco industry, the author performs a literature review and analyze two tobacco disputes and its possible implication on the public health debate and protection of foreign investors.

This case study illustrates the complex paradigm that interlink economic and human rights obligations of States on one side of the spectrum and property rights and social responsibilities of tobacco companies on the other side.

This chapter addresses a very topical and pertinent issue in public international law, namely: the role of public interest norms in the regime of foreign direct investment.

This article aims to deal with international investment disputes, with a focus on the nature of the law applicable to the merits of such disputes.

The procedure for determining the law applicable in investment disputes, the phases of determination and the impact thereof on the applicable law were analyzed. The diagonality of the disputes and its impact on the law applicable to the merits from the perspective of the interaction between national and international law were also analyzed. Further, the authors focused on the nature of the host state's breach of obligations towards the investor anchored in the investment treaty, and the effect thereof on the law applicable to the merits. In this respect, the notion of the investment itself was analyzed according to the relevant BITs and MITs. Finally, the authors analyzed the applicability of the Ordre Public concept to investment disputes.

The study provided practical demonstrations and examples of choice of law and application issues as resolved by the tribunals established under the ICSID.

The article deals mainly with the ICSID proceedings. Another should be also analyzed.

The paper provides a new insight into issues of the law applicable to investment disputes by analyzing this problematic in relation to all stages of investment arbitration proceedings. Particularly it took an innovative approach in shedding light on and analyzing the applicability of the Ordre Public concept in relation to investment protection, especially in relation to Article 52 of the ICSID Convention, and the recognition and enforcement proceedings of arbitral awards issued in the course of investment arbitration.

This chapter seeks to explain the effects of actions in investment treaty tribunals against states in the European Periphery. The chapter examines the case of Spain and the multiple actions brought against it due to changes in support structures for the production of solar electricity. The aim of this analysis is to test whether investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) can further the cause of environmental sustainability.

In its opening part the chapter employs a ‘socio-legal’ methodology, showing the links between legal frameworks and the evolution of social and political norms. The chapter then adopts a ‘law and economics’ approach in presenting recent developments seeking to tease out the dynamic between legal changes, economic effects, policy reactions and dispute resolution.

While there is significant uncertainty over the strength of the legal arguments of claimants, it seems possible that they will be successful in claiming compensation from the Spanish government. Nonetheless, a win for the investors is unlikely to reverse the Spanish policy of ending support for renewables due to fiscal constraints. The conclusion is that such actions have a negative impact in terms of promoting the spread of renewables and they inhibit recovery in crisis hit nations.

The chapter offers context on the use of ISDS against the background of the European crisis. This analysis has wider connotations for policy design as it feeds directly into concerns about multilateral agreements under negotiation, such as TTIP.

This is the first comprehensive academic study of the changes in Spanish regulatory frameworks regarding clean energy incentives. It is also the first comprehensive presentation of the actions brought against Spain as a result of these changes.

The purpose of this study is to examine the legal system that overrules these concerns within the body of the international investment laws. The question which remains is how can host countries and their ruling bodies maintain their national security without disregarding the legitimate expectations of foreign investments and their international responsibilities?

Balancing the relationship between the national security of the host country and the legitimate expectations of the foreign investments is one of the oldest challenges within the body of the international investment laws because the realization of the right to maintain the national security, without regulating the host countries, leaves room for corruption, and meeting the legitimate expectations of the foreign investments can lead to the disruption of the national sovereignty of the host country.

Studies show that the international investment laws do not take a clear stance when it comes to regulating the relationship between the national security of the host countries and the legitimate expectations of the foreign investments and that they are, in fact, in some cases, paradoxical and disorganized; there are instances of attempts to overprotect the national security of the host country, while the rights and the benefits of the foreign investments are disregarded,

At times there is an attempt to expand the realm of legitimate expectations of the foreign investments which would, in turn, disrupt the national security of the host country.