Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recent Developments in International Investment Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2016

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((EUROYEAR,volume 7))

  • 1438 Accesses

Abstract

International investment law remains a fast evolving and vibrant field of law with ongoing and recently-concluded investment treaty negotiations continually altering the status quo. It is a system at a crossroads of reform, generally focused on safeguarding the right of the host state to regulate and on improving the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism. But reform may also come into play in more far-reaching ways and significant changes are likely to see the day in the near future. One such change concerns the institutional architecture of the resolution of investment disputes, with the possible establishment of a permanent investment court and/or the introduction of an appellate mechanism. Another one relates to the new potential for multilateralism in international investment relations, with UNCITRAL’s Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (hereinafter UNCITRAL Transparency Convention) constituting a step in this direction. At the same time, international investment law is a body of jurisprudence. Investor-state tribunals have continued to interpret international investment agreements (IIAs) and grant compensations to aggrieved investors, exercising their authoritative power on how international investment commitments undertaken by contracting parties are to be understood.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    UNCTAD, Recent Trends in IIAs and ISDS, IIA Issues Note No. 1, February 2015, p. 2.

  2. 2.

    UNCTAD, Recent Trends in IIAs and ISDS, IIA Issues Note No. 1, February 2015, p. 2.

  3. 3.

    The agreements are available through the European Commission’s website http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  4. 4.

    Titi (2015a).

  5. 5.

    Regulation (EU) No 912/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for managing financial responsibility linked to investor-to-state dispute settlement tribunals established by international agreements to which the European Union is party.

  6. 6.

    UNCTAD, Recent Trends in IIAs and ISDS, IIA Issues Note No. 1, February 2015, p. 3.

  7. 7.

    On TTIP negotiations, http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  8. 8.

    On TTP, https://ustr.gov/tpp (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  9. 9.

    See http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/investment/index_en.htm (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  10. 10.

    See http://www.energycharter.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Legal/IEC_EN.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  11. 11.

    See http://www.energycharter.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Legal/IEC_EN.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  12. 12.

    Point 4 of the International Energy Charter. The text of the Charter is available at: http://www.energycharter.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Legal/IEC_EN.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  13. 13.

    UNCTAD, Recent Trends in IIAs and ISDS, IIA Issues Note No. 1, February 2015, p. 2.

  14. 14.

    Peterson LE, Italy follows Russia in withdrawing from Energy Charter Treaty, but for surprising reason. IA Reporter, 17 April 2015, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20150417_1 (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  15. 15.

    Peterson LE, Italy follows Russia in withdrawing from Energy Charter Treaty, but for surprising reason. IA Reporter, 17 April 2015, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20150417_1 (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  16. 16.

    Peterson LE, Italy follows Russia in withdrawing from Energy Charter Treaty, but for surprising reason. IA Reporter, 17 April 2015, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20150417_1 (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  17. 17.

    See http://unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Indonesia_side-event-Wednesday_model-agreements.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  18. 18.

    See http://unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Indonesia_side-event-Wednesday_model-agreements.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015). See further Peterson LE, As Indonesia reconsiders its investment treaties, arbitrators don’t want to slow down mining case by separating liability and damages phases. IA Reporter, 28 April 2014, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20140428 (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  19. 19.

    The elements discussed here are based on a presentation by Abdulkadir Jailani of Indonesia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, during UNCTAD’s Expert Meeting on the Transformation of the International Investment Agreement Regime on 25 February 2015. The presentation is available at: http://unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Indonesia_side-event-Wednesday_model-agreements.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  20. 20.

    See http://unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/India_side-event-Wednesday_model-agreements.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  21. 21.

    The draft text of India’s model BIT is available at: https://mygov.in/sites/default/files/master_image/Model%20Text%20for%20the%20Indian%20Bilateral%20Investment%20Treaty.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  22. 22.

    Article 1 of the Draft Indian Model BIT (2015).

  23. 23.

    Article 3 of the Draft Indian Model BIT (2015).

  24. 24.

    Articles 8 ff. of the Draft Indian Model BIT (2015).

  25. 25.

    Article 14 of the Draft Indian Model BIT (2015).

  26. 26.

    Information and the full text of these agreements are available at: http://www.mdic.gov.br//sitio/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  27. 27.

    UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2014, New York and Geneva: UN, p. 4, figure I.3, see also p. 28, figure I.28.

  28. 28.

    Indeed, on UNCTAD’s IIA database, the text of the two agreements is to be found under the section ‘other IIAs’ and not ‘bilateral investment treaties’.

  29. 29.

    On Brazil’s new model, see Titi C, International Investment Law and the Protection of Foreign Investment in Brazil (forthcoming).

  30. 30.

    See https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/e47326b61f424d4c9c3d470896492623/consultation-letter.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015). Norway’s 2007 draft model was abandoned without being adopted.

  31. 31.

    See explanation relating to the public consultation, available at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/e47326b61f424d4c9c3d470896492623/consultation-letter.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015), p. 6.

  32. 32.

    Article [24] of Norway’s Draft Model BIT (2015).

  33. 33.

    Article [26] of Norway’s Draft Model BIT (2015).

  34. 34.

    Article [6] of Norway’s Draft Model BIT (2015).

  35. 35.

    Article 1 of Protocol One of the European Convention on Human Rights.

  36. 36.

    Article [6] of Norway’s Draft Model BIT (2015).

  37. 37.

    European Parliament, Committee on International Trade, Working document in view of preparing the draft report on Parliament’s recommendations to the Commission on the negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), 2014–2019, 9 January 2015, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&reference=PE-546.593&format=PDF&language=EN&secondRef=01 (last accessed 17 September 2015), p. 6.

  38. 38.

    Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions, The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)(2015/C 140/02), available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1404723846895&uri=OJ:JOC_2015_140_R_0002 (last accessed 17 September 2015), para. 35.

  39. 39.

    Point 4 of the International Energy Charter.

  40. 40.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  41. 41.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  42. 42.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  43. 43.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  44. 44.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  45. 45.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  46. 46.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  47. 47.

    European Commission, Concept Paper, Investment in TTIP and beyond—the path for reform, May 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  48. 48.

    The model is available at: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/M-O/modell-investitionsschutzvertrag-mit-investor-staat-schiedsverfahren-gutachten,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  49. 49.

    See also http://www.rph1.jura.uni-erlangen.de/material/150429-muster-bit-fr-industriestaaten-krajewski-englische-bersetzung.pdf (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  50. 50.

    Peterson LE, Ten years after last major reforms, ICSID to float new amendments, including transparency improvements, and possibly appeals process. IA Reporter, 3 July 2014, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/ten-years-after-last-major-reforms-icsid-to-float-new-amendments-including-transparency-improvements-and-possibly-appeals-process/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  51. 51.

    Titi (2014), p. 380.

  52. 52.

    Titi (2014), p. 380.

  53. 53.

    See Ecuador, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Mobility, Expertos de Unasur consolidan texto para la creación del Centro de Solución de Controversias en Materia de Investiones, 7 November 2014, http://www.cancilleria.gob.ec/es/expertos-de-unasur-consolidan-texto-para-la-creacion-del-centro-de-solucion-de-controversias-en-materia-de-inversiones/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  54. 54.

    On the adoption of the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules, see Titi (2015b).

  55. 55.

    Article 1(1) of the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules.

  56. 56.

    Article 1(2) of the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules.

  57. 57.

    Article 1(9) of the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules.

  58. 58.

    See Article X.33 of the draft CETA chapter on investment, version of September 2014. On transparency and the European Union’s investment policymaking, see further Titi (2015a).

  59. 59.

    Article 15 of the Colombia-France BIT (2014).

  60. 60.

    The Transparency Registry is available at http://www.uncitral.org/transparency-registry/en/introduction.html (last accessed March 2015).

  61. 61.

    See the Transparency Registry, http://www.uncitral.org/transparency-registry/en/introduction.html (last accessed March 2015).

  62. 62.

    The Convention is available at http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/transparency-convention/Transparency-Convention-e.pdf (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  63. 63.

    Article 2 of the UNCITRAL Transparency Convention.

  64. 64.

    For the status of the Convention, see http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/2014Transparency_Convention_status.html (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  65. 65.

    See European Commission News Archive, European Commission pushes for full transparency for ISDS in current investment treaties, 29 January 2015, available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1247 (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  66. 66.

    Peterson LE, Ten years after last major reforms, ICSID to float new amendments, including transparency improvements, and possibly appeals process. IA Reporter, 3 July 2014, http://www.iareporter.com/articles/ten-years-after-last-major-reforms-icsid-to-float-new-amendments-including-transparency-improvements-and-possibly-appeals-process/ (last accessed 17 September 2015).

  67. 67.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 2.

  68. 68.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 2.

  69. 69.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 4.

  70. 70.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 2.

  71. 71.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 2.

  72. 72.

    E.g. see http://www.encharter.org/index.php?id=213. (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  73. 73.

    See http://www.encharter.org/index.php?id=213. (last accessed 24 September 2015). See also Trevino C, Spain round-up: Even as European Commission throws up red flags, two new claims land at ICSID, and tribunal members are finalized in another. IA Reporter, 27 January 2015 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/spain-round-up-even-as-european-commission-throws-up-red-flags-two-new-claims-land-at-icsid-and-tribunal-members-are-finalized-in-another/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  74. 74.

    In two cases, the investor’s home country is not known. UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 3.

  75. 75.

    In two cases, the investor’s home country is not known. UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 3.

  76. 76.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 4.

  77. 77.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 5.

  78. 78.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 4.

  79. 79.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 4.

  80. 80.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 5.

  81. 81.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 5.

  82. 82.

    In two cases, the investor’s home country is not known. UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 3.

  83. 83.

    In two cases, the investor’s home country is not known. UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 3.

  84. 84.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013.

  85. 85.

    Cite Award. If not citing award: Peterson LE, In Romania case, EU expresses doubts as to legality of ordering EU state to compensate investors for lost incentives. IA Reporter, 6 January 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/in-romania-case-eu-expresses-doubts-as-to-legality-of-ordering-eu-state-to-compensate-investors-for-lost-incentives/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  86. 86.

    Cite Award. If not citing award: Peterson LE, In Romania case, EU expresses doubts as to legality of ordering EU state to compensate investors for lost incentives. IA Reporter, 6 January 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/in-romania-case-eu-expresses-doubts-as-to-legality-of-ordering-eu-state-to-compensate-investors-for-lost-incentives/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  87. 87.

    Cite Award. If not citing award: Peterson LE, In Romania case, EU expresses doubts as to legality of ordering EU state to compensate investors for lost incentives. IA Reporter, 6 January 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/in-romania-case-eu-expresses-doubts-as-to-legality-of-ordering-eu-state-to-compensate-investors-for-lost-incentives/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  88. 88.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 334.

  89. 89.

    CJEU, Case C-126/97 Eco Swiss v. Benetton ECR [1999] 1-3055, para. 35–41.

  90. 90.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 335.

  91. 91.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 336.

  92. 92.

    European Commission, State aid SA.38517(2014/C) (ex 2014/NN)—Romania, Implementation of Arbitral award Micula v Romania of 11 December 2013, C(2014) 6848 final, Brussels, 01.10.2014, http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/254586/254586_1595781_31_11.pdf (last accessed March 2015), para. 6.

  93. 93.

    European Commission, State aid SA.38517(2014/C) (ex 2014/NN)—Romania, Implementation of Arbitral award Micula v Romania of 11 December 2013, C(2014) 6848 final, Brussels, 01.10.2014, http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/254586/254586_1595781_31_11.pdf (last accessed March 2015), para. 71.

  94. 94.

    European Commission, State aid SA.38517(2014/C) (ex 2014/NN)—Romania, Implementation of Arbitral award Micula v Romania of 11 December 2013, C(2014) 6848 final, Brussels, 01.10.2014, http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/254586/254586_1595781_31_11.pdf (last accessed March 2015), para. 72.

  95. 95.

    Peterson LE, Tribunal is named for bank’s BIT claim vs. Greece as European Commission makes new amicus bid in another ICSID proceeding. IA Reporter, 21 October 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/tribunal-is-named-for-banks-bit-claim-vs-greece-as-european-commission-makes-new-amicus-bid-in-another-icsid-proceeding/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  96. 96.

    Peterson LE, Tribunal is named for bank’s BIT claim vs. Greece as European Commission makes new amicus bid in another ICSID proceeding. IA Reporter, 21 October 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/tribunal-is-named-for-banks-bit-claim-vs-greece-as-european-commission-makes-new-amicus-bid-in-another-icsid-proceeding/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  97. 97.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/13, Caratube International Oil Company LLP & Mr. Devincci Salah Hourani v. Kazakhstan, Decision on the Proposal for Disqualification of Bruno Boesch, 20 March 2014. The other three known disqualifications under the ICSID Convention took place in ICSID Case No. ARB/98/2, Victor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v. Chile, decision of 21 February 2006; ICSID Case No. ARB/12/20, Blue Bank International & Trust (Barbados) Ltd. v. Venezuela, decision of 12 November 2013; ICSID Case No. ARB/08/5, Burlington Resources, Inc. v. Ecuador, decision of 13 December 2013.

  98. 98.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/13, Caratube International Oil Company LLP & Mr. Devincci Salah Hourani v. Kazakhstan, Decision on the Proposal for Disqualification of Bruno Boesch, 20 March 2014, para. 64.

  99. 99.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/13, Caratube International Oil Company LLP & Mr. Devincci Salah Hourani v. Kazakhstan, Decision on the Proposal for Disqualification of Bruno Boesch, 20 March 2014, para. 89–90.

  100. 100.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, 7 January 2014.

  101. 101.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 87.

  102. 102.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 100.

  103. 103.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 100.

  104. 104.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 89, 100. Rule 53 of the ICSID Arbitration Rules provides: ‘The provisions of these Rules shall apply mutatis mutandis to any procedure relating to the interpretation, revision or annulment of an award and to the decision of the Tribunal or Committee.’

  105. 105.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 101.

  106. 106.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 131.

  107. 107.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/09/4, Elsamex, S.A. v. Honduras, Decision on Elsamex S.A.’s preliminary objection—Annulment proceeding, 7 January 2014, para. 147.

  108. 108.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014.

  109. 109.

    Article XI(4)(a) of the Australia-Indonesia BIT.

  110. 110.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014, para. 161.

  111. 111.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014, para. 163.

  112. 112.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014, para. 189.

  113. 113.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014, para. 191 ff.

  114. 114.

    Article 13(3)(a) of the Australia-Sri Lanka BIT, emphasis added.

  115. 115.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Indonesia, Decision on Jurisdiction, 24 February 2014, para. 200 ff.

  116. 116.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 270.

  117. 117.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 271.

  118. 118.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 270, 280.

  119. 119.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 282.

  120. 120.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 292.

  121. 121.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 292.

  122. 122.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 293.

  123. 123.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5, Abaclat and Others v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 4 August 2011, para. 492.

  124. 124.

    Abaclat and Others v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 4 August 2011, para. 520.

  125. 125.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 305.

  126. 126.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 305.

  127. 127.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 306.

  128. 128.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 311.

  129. 129.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/08/09, Ambiente Ufficio S.p.A. and others v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 8 February 2013.

  130. 130.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 315–316.

  131. 131.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07/8, Giovanni Alemanni v. Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 November 2014, para. 316–317.

  132. 132.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015.

  133. 133.

    The other one is the ICSID Case No. ARB/14/16, Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co. Ltd. v. Greece, registered 16 July 2014.

  134. 134.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 298 ff., 304 ff.

  135. 135.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 314. An apparent contradiction exists between this statement and another statement in paragraph 313, where there the group or category of assets is described as ‘not closed, or limited or restrictive’.

  136. 136.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 313.

  137. 137.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 312.

  138. 138.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 331.

  139. 139.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 332.

  140. 140.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 335.

  141. 141.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 336 ff.

  142. 142.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 341 ff.

  143. 143.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 350.

  144. 144.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/13/8, Poštová banka, a.s. and ISTROKAPITAL SE v. Greece, Award, 9 April 2015, para. 360 ff.

  145. 145.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/29, Ping An Life Insurance Company of China, Limited and Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Limited v. Belgium, registered 19 September 2012.

  146. 146.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/12/29, Ping An Life Insurance Company of China, Limited and Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Limited v. Belgium, Award, 30 April 2015 (not public).

  147. 147.

    Peterson LE, Belgium prevails in billion dollar ICSID arbitration brought by Chinese investors in failed Fortis bank. IA Reporter, 1 May 2015 http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20150501 (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  148. 148.

    UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. 2013-13, Sanum v. Laos, Award on Jurisdiction, 13 December 2013, para. 329.

  149. 149.

    Peterson LE, Following PCA decision, Czech Republic thwarts move by solar investors to sue in single arbitral proceeding; meanwhile Spain sees new solar claim at ICSID. IA Reporter, 1 January 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/following-pca-decision-czech-republic-thwarts-move-by-solar-investors-to-sue-in-single-arbitral-proceeding-meanwhile-spain-sees-new-solar-claim-at-icsid/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  150. 150.

    Peterson LE, Following PCA decision, Czech Republic thwarts move by solar investors to sue in single arbitral proceeding; meanwhile Spain sees new solar claim at ICSID. IA Reporter, 1 January 2014 https://www.iareporter.com/articles/following-pca-decision-czech-republic-thwarts-move-by-solar-investors-to-sue-in-single-arbitral-proceeding-meanwhile-spain-sees-new-solar-claim-at-icsid/ (last accessed 24 September 2015).

  151. 151.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013.

  152. 152.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 665.

  153. 153.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 666.

  154. 154.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 724–725.

  155. 155.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 797.

  156. 156.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 802.

  157. 157.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 802.

  158. 158.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 806.

  159. 159.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 825.

  160. 160.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, Award, 11 December 2013, para. 826.

  161. 161.

    ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, Gold Reserve Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 22 September 2014.

  162. 162.

    ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, Gold Reserve Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 22 September 2014, para. 567.

  163. 163.

    ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, Gold Reserve Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 22 September 2014, para. 567.

  164. 164.

    ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, Gold Reserve Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 22 September 2014, para. 567.

  165. 165.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestión e Ingenería IDC S.A. v. Venezuela, Award, 18 November 2014, para. 376, 630.

  166. 166.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestión e Ingenería IDC S.A. v. Venezuela, Award, 18 November 2014, para. 378, 631.

  167. 167.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestión e Ingenería IDC S.A. v. Venezuela, Award, 18 November 2014, para. 633.

  168. 168.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestión e Ingenería IDC S.A. v. Venezuela, Award, 18 November 2014, para. 635 ff.

  169. 169.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestión e Ingenería IDC S.A. v. Venezuela, Award, 18 November 2014, para. 365.

  170. 170.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6, Perenco Ecuador Limited v. Ecuador, Decision on Remaining Issues of Jurisdiction and on Liability, 12 September 2014, para. 672, emphasis in original.

  171. 171.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6, Perenco Ecuador Limited v. Ecuador, Decision on Remaining Issues of Jurisdiction and on Liability, 12 September 2014, para. 673.

  172. 172.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07, Mobil Corporation, Venezuela Holdings, B.V., Mobil Cerro Negro Holding, Ltd., Mobil Venezolana de Petróleos Holdings, Inc., Mobil Cerro Negro, Ltd., and Mobil Venezolana de Petróleos, Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 9 October 2014, para. 286.

  173. 173.

    ICSID Case No. ARB/07, Mobil Corporation, Venezuela Holdings, B.V., Mobil Cerro Negro Holding, Ltd., Mobil Venezolana de Petróleos Holdings, Inc., Mobil Cerro Negro, Ltd., and Mobil Venezolana de Petróleos, Inc. v. Venezuela, Award, 9 October 2014, para. 286.

  174. 174.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2014. IIA Issues Note No. 2, May 2015, p. 18.

  175. 175.

    UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 226, Hulley Enterprises Limited (Cyprus) v. Russia, Final Award, 18 July 2014; UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 228, Veteran Petroleum Limited (Cyprus) v. Russian, Final Award, 18 July 2014; UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 227, Yukos Universal Limited (Isle of Man) v. Russian, Final Award, 18 July 2014.

  176. 176.

    UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 226, Hulley Enterprises Limited (Cyprus) v. Russia, Final Award, 18 July 2014, para. 1694; UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 228, Veteran Petroleum Limited (Cyprus) v. Russian, Final Award, 18 July 2014, para. 1694; UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 227, Yukos Universal Limited (Isle of Man) v. Russian, Final Award, 18 July 2014, para. 1694.

  177. 177.

    United States Court of Appeals, No. 11-7021, Argentina v. BG Group PLC, No. 1:08-cv-00485 (2012), http://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0085.pdf (last accessed 9 March 2015).

  178. 178.

    Supreme Court of the United States, No. 12-138, Opinion in the case BG Group PLC v. Argentina, 572 US (2014), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-138_97be.pdf (last accessed March 2015).

  179. 179.

    Supreme Court of the United States, No. 12-138, Opinion in the case BG Group PLC v. Argentina, 572 US (2014), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-138_97be.pdf (last accessed March 2015), p. 17.

  180. 180.

    Supreme Court of the United States, No. 12-138, Opinion in the case BG Group PLC v. Argentina, 572 US (2014), Dissenting by Justices Robert and Kennedy, http://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw3117.pdf (last accessed March 2015), p. 9.

  181. 181.

    This is said with the caveat that little is known of the second award at the time of writing.

References

  • Titi C (2014) Investment arbitration in Latin America: the uncertain veracity of preconceived ideas. Arbitr Int 30(2):357–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titi C (2015a) Investment law and the European Union: towards a new generation of international investment agreements. Eur J Int Law 26(3):639–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Titi C (2015b) Institutional developments in investor-state dispute settlement and arbitration under the auspices of the International Centre for Settlement of investment disputes. In: Herrmann C, Krajewski M, Terchechte JP (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2015. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), Paris, France

    Catharine Titi

  2. CREDIMI, University of Burgundy, Dijon, France

    Catharine Titi

Authors
  1. Catharine Titi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catharine Titi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chair for Public Law, International and European Law, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Marc Bungenberg

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Passau , Passau, Germany

    Christoph Herrmann

  3. Chair for Public Law and International Law, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg Faculty of Law, Erlangen, Germany

    Markus Krajewski

  4. Competition and Regulation Institute, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Jörg Philipp Terhechte

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Titi, C. (2016). Recent Developments in International Investment Law. In: Bungenberg, M., Herrmann, C., Krajewski, M., Terhechte, J. (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2016. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29215-1_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29215-1_31

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-29214-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-29215-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation