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

Monográfica

Núm. 22 (2018)

Re-thinking the requirement of making an investment in accordance with domestic laws as a substantive right and a cause of action for host states under the BITs

  • Félix Antolín Martínez
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18272/iu.v22i22.1188
Submitted
July 15, 2018
Published
2018-12-13

Abstract

This paper challenges one of the most traditional notions in international investment arbitration, which is that host states don"™t have any substantive rights under the BIT"™s framework. This work"™s thesis is that the current BIT framework actually grants the host state a substantive right, and therefore a cause of action in the investment arbitration system. This right emanates from the requirement that the investment must be in accordance with the host state"™s law. The paper explains that there"™s a line of both BITs and ICSID cases that hold the requirement of compliance with the host state"™s laws as autonomous, and that this autonomy imports a substantive right for the host states grounded solely in the BITs. This idea is also supported by the spirit and objectives of both the ICSID Convention and the BITs. viewed = 634 times

References

  1. Escobar, A. (2003). UNCTAD Course on Dispute Settlement in International Trade, Investment and Intellectual Property, module 2.5 5. Geneva: United Nations.
  2. Kahale, G. (2014). III, Keynote Speech during the Eight Annual Juris Investment Treaty Arbitration Conference. Washington, D.C.
  3. Kriebaum, U. (2010). Chapter V: Investment Arbitration. Illegal Investments. In C. Klausegger, P. Klein, et al. (eds.). Austrian Arbitration Yearbook 2010. London: C.H. Beck, Stämpfi & Manz.
  4. Laborde, G. (2010). Te Case for Host State Claims in Investment Arbitration. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 97, 111-113.
  5. Newcombe, A. (2010). Te Question of Admissibility of Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration. Kluwer Arbitration Blog.
  6. Rose-Ackerman, S. and Tobin, J. (2009). Do BITs Beneft Developing Countries? In C. A. Rogers and R. P. Alford (eds.). The Future of Investment Arbitration (pp. 131-143). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Tawil, G. (2003). UNCTAD Course on Dispute Settlement in International Trade, Investment and Intellectual Property, module 2.616. Geneva: United Nations.
  8. Toral, M. and Schultz, T. (2009). Te State, a Perpetual Respondent in Investment Arbitration? Some Unorthodox Considerations. In M. Waibel et al. eds, The Backlash Against Investment Arbitration (pp. 577-578). London: Wolters Kluwer. Decisions ICSID (1978). Gabon v. Société Serete S.A., ICSID Case No. ARB/76/1.
  9. "” (1998). Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited v. Independent Power Tanzania Limited, ICSID Case No. ARB/98/8, Final Award (2001).
  10. "” (2000). Salini Costruttori S.p.A. and Italstrade S.p.A. v. Kingdom of Morocco, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/4, Decision on Jurisdiction (2003), in 42 International Legal Materials 52, 57.
  11. "” (2003). Inceysa Vallisoletana, S.L. v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB 03/26, Award (English translation) 186 (2006).
  12. "” (2003). Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB 03/24, Award 138 (2008).
  13. "” (2005). Biwater Gauf (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22, Award 310, 312-318 (2008).
  14. "” (2005). Malaysian Historical Salvors SDN BHD v. The Government of Malaysia, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/10, Decision on the Application for Annulment (2009).
  15. "” (2006). Phoenix Action, Ltd. v. The Czech Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/5, Award 100-105, 134 (2009).
  16. "” (2007). Government of the Province of East Kalimantan v. PT Kaltim Prima Coal "” others, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/3, Award on Jurisdiction (2009).
  17. "” (2008). Burlington Resources, Inc. v. Republic of Ecuador. ICSID Case No. ARB/08/5. Decision on Counterclaims (2017).
  18. "” (2008). Perenco Ecuador Limited v. Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6, Interim Decision on Environmental Counterclaim (2015).
  19. "” (2011). Caravelí Cotaruse Transmisora de Energía S.A.C. v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/9, Final Award (2013).
  20. "” (2013). Republic of Peru v. Caravelí Cotaruse Transmisora de Energía S.A.C., ICSID Case No. ARB/13/24, Procedural Order Acknowledging the Discontinuance of the Proceedings (2013).
  21. Legislation:
  22. Government of the Czech Republic / Government of the State of Israel (1997). Agreement between the Government of the Czech Republic and the Government of the State of Israel for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments.
  23. Government of the Republic of Finland / Government of the Republic of Estonia (1993). Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of the Republic of Estonia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, Preamble.
  24. Federal Republic of Germany / Republic of Philippines (1998). Agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Philippines for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, Article 1.
  25. Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland / Government of the Republic of Indonesia (1977). Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, Preamble.
  26. Republic of Peru / Kingdom of Spain (1994). Agreement for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Republic of Peru and the Kingdom of Spain, Article 1.
  27. Kingdom of Spain / Republic of El Salvador (1996). Agreement for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of El Salvador, Article 2.
  28. Kingdom of the Netherlands / Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (1992). Agreement on encouragement and reciprocal protection of investments between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, Article 2.
  29. ICSID (2012). International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Articles of Agreement, Article I.
  30. "” (2006). International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules 11.