Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Iuris Dictio

Monográfica

Núm. 22 (2018)

Precedent in International Investment Law: the argumentative value of previous arbitration decisions

DOI
https://doi.org/10.18272/iu.v22i22.1187
Submitted
July 15, 2018
Published
2018-12-13

Abstract

The article studies the constant use of previous awards in investment arbitration, where parties and arbitral tribunals frequently resort to prior arbitration decisions to justify and argue their own decisions. In this sense, previous arbitration decisions have been used to give shape to abstract norms such as the Fair and Equitable Treatment standard. In this regard, it can be affrmed that the reference of arbitral tribunals to previous cases is not only referential, but also forms part of the construction of obligations that are required of the states. This article studies different explanations that both the doctrine and the arbitral tribunals themselves have developed to conceptualize the use of prior arbitration decisions in international investment law. Additionally, it is argued about the need to conceive of these previous decisions as an expression of the exercise of public authority by investment arbitration. viewed = 530 times

References

  1. Bogdandy, A. (2014). Common Principles for a Plurality of Orders: A Study on Public Authority in the European Legal Area. International Journal of Constitutional Law Oxford, (12), 987.
  2. Bogdandy, A. y Venzje, I., (2014). In Whose Name? A Public Law Teory of International Adjudication. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  3. De Brabandere, E. (2012). Arbitral Decisions as a Source of International Investment Law. En Tarcisio Gazzini y Eric de Brabandere. International Investment Law: The Sources of Rights and Obligations. Boston: Martinus Nijhof.
  4. Dolzer, R, y Stevens, M. (1995). Bilateral investment Treaties. Boston: Martinus Nijhof.
  5. Dolzer, R. / Schreuer, C. (2008). Principles of International Investment Law. Boston: Oxford University Press.
  6. Hall, R. y Biersteker, T, (2002). Te Emerge of Private Authority in the International System. Cambridge Studies in International Relations 85, 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Jefery, P. (2007). Precedent in Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Citation Analysis of a Developing Jurisprudence. Journal of International Arbitration, Kluwer Law International, 24 (2), 129-158.
  8. Kishoiyian, B. (1993). Te Utility of Bilateral Investment Treaties in the Formulation of Customary International Law. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 14 (2), 327-375.
  9. Mills, A. (2011). Antinomies of Public and Private at the Foundations of International Investment Law and Arbitration. Journal of International Economic Law, 14 (2,1), 469-503.
  10. Porterfeld, M. (2006). An International Common Law of Investors Rights. Journal ofInternational Law, 27, 84-85.
  11. Schill, W. (2009). Te Multilateralization of International Investment Law. Boston: Cambridge University Press.
  12. "” (2010). International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Schreuer, C. (2001). Te ICSID Convention: A Commentary on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Sornarajah, M. (2000). Te Settlement of Foreign Investment Disputes. Chicago: Kluwer Law International.
  15. "” (2004). Te International Law on Foreign Investment. Boston: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Titi, C. (2013). Te Arbitrator as a Lawmaker: Jurisgenerative Processes in Investment Arbitration. Te Journal of World Investment & Trade, 14, 829-851.
  17. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2015). IIA Note issue 2.
  18. Zhan, J et al. (2018). La Inversión y las nuevas políticas Industriales. UNCTAD. Ginebra: Naciones Unidas.
  19. Sentencias:
  20. ICSID (2006). Azurix Corp. v. La República Argentina (I), No. ARB/01/12, Award.
  21. "” (2007). Saipem S. p, A. v. People`s Republic of Bangladesh. No. ARB/05/7, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures.
  22. "” (2010). Burlington Resources Inc v. la República del Ecuador, No. ARB/08/5, Decision on Jurisdiction.
  23. "” (2010). Global Trading Resource Corp. and Globex International, Inc. v. Ukraine, No ARB/09/11, Award.
  24. "” (2012). Occidental Petroleum Corporation and Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. Republic of Ecuador (II), Case No. ARB/06/11, Award.
  25. UNCITRAL (2002). United Parcel Service of America Inc (UPS) v. Government of Canada. No. UNCT/02/1, Award on Jurisdiction.
  26. "” (2006). International Tunderbird Gaming Corporation v Te United Mexican States, NAFTA arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, Separate Opinion Tomas W. Wälde.
  27. "” (2009) Glamis Gold, Ltd. v United States of America. UNCITRAL Rules, Award, (2009).
  28. Convenciones, tratados y conferencias:
  29. ONU (1945) Estatuto de la Corte Internacional de Justicia (ECIJ). La CIJ comenzó a funcionar 6 de febrero de 1946.
  30. ONU (1958). Convención sobre el Reconocimiento y la Ejecución de las Sentencias Arbitrales Extranjeras: UNCITRAL. Adoptada por la Asamblea Nacional el 19 de agosto de 1961.
  31. ONU (1969). Convención de Viena sobre el Derecho de los Tratados. Adoptada por Decreto Ejecutivo el 28 de julio de 2003.
  32. ONU (2015). United Nations Conference On Trade And Development. IIA Note issue 2, 2015.