Cover of book: Die Widerklage des Staates in ICSID-Schiedsverfahren
Buy in shop
, to see if you have full access to this publication.
Monograph No access

Die Widerklage des Staates in ICSID-Schiedsverfahren

Eine Analyse der Kriterien der Zuständigkeit und der Konnexität
Authors:
Publisher:
 2024

Summary

States rarely file counterclaims in investment arbitration proceedings. Although the number of counterclaims has increased in recent years, this increase has been relatively modest. Against this backdrop, this thesis analyses whether there is an inherent obstacle to state counterclaims in ICSID arbitration proceedings. To this end, the author analyses the prerequisites of jurisdiction and close connection. She systematises the existing case law and literature according to her own criteria and develops standards for the assessment of jurisdiction and close connection. This thesis is thus both a scholarly analysis of the topic as well as a handbook on counterclaims in ICSID arbitration proceedings, filling a gap in the literature.

Keywords

Bibliographic data

Edition
1/2024
Copyright Year
2024
ISBN-Print
978-3-7560-1826-0
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-4489-8
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series
Studien zum Internationalen Investitionsrecht
Volume
48
Language
German
Pages
461
Product Type
Monograph

Table of contents

ChapterPages
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access 1 - 18
    1. A. Grundkonstellation No access
    2. B. Eingrenzung des Themas No access
    3. C. Problematik No access
    4. D. Gang der Darstellung No access
      1. I. Der Begriff der Widerklage No access
      2. II. Parteien der Widerklage No access
      3. III. Bewertung als selbstverständliches Recht? No access
      4. IV. Abgrenzung zur Einrede No access
      5. V. Abgrenzung zur Verteidigung No access
      6. VI. Abgrenzung zur Aufrechnung No access
      7. VII. Unterscheidung der Widerklage je nach Zusammenhang mit der ursprünglichen Klage No access
      8. VIII. Zusammenfassung No access
    2. B. Motive No access
          1. a) Zulässigkeit einer Regelung der Widerklage in der Verfahrensordnung No access
          2. b) Regelung in der Verfahrensordnung von 1922/1926 No access
          3. c) Artikel 40 Absatz 2 der Verfahrensordnung in der Rechtsprechung des Ständigen Internationalen Gerichtshofs No access
          4. d) Regelung in der Verfahrensordnung von 1936 und ihre Umsetzung in der Rechtsprechung des Ständigen Internationalen Gerichtshofs No access
          1. a) Regelungen in der Verfahrensordnung No access
          2. b) Behandlung der Widerklage in der Rechtsprechung des Internationalen Gerichtshofs No access
        3. 3. Zusammenfassung No access
      2. II. Ständiger Schiedshof No access
      3. III. Internationaler Seegerichtshof No access
        1. 1. Widerklage als selbstverständliches Recht No access
        2. 2. Ausschließliche Zuständigkeit des Iran-US Claims Tribunals für Widerklagen? No access
        3. 3. Behandlung von Widerklagen seitens des Iran-US Claims Tribunals No access
      5. V. Zusammenfassung No access
      1. I. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law No access
      2. II. International Chamber of Commerce No access
      3. III. Stockholm Chamber of Commerce No access
      4. IV. London Court of International Arbitration No access
      5. V. Zusammenfassung No access
    5. E. Zusammenfassung No access
  4. Kapitel 2: Artikel 46 des ICSID-Übereinkommens und Artikel 40 der Arbitration Rules No access 103 - 108
      1. I. Consent aus einem Investitionsvertrag No access
          1. a) Eindeutige Klauseln No access
          2. b) Extensive Klauseln No access
          3. c) Restriktive Klauseln No access
          4. d) Gemischte Klauseln No access
          1. a) Auslegung von internationalen Abkommen No access
            1. aa) Extensive Formulierung No access
            2. bb) Restriktive Formulierung No access
            3. cc) Interpretation durch das anwendbare Recht No access
              1. (1) Grundsatz der Trennung zwischen Treaty Claims und Contract Claims nach Compania de aguas del aconquija S.A. and Vivendi Universal v. Argentine Republic No access
              2. (2) Sind vertragliche Streitigkeiten vom Wortlaut der Schiedsklausel umfasst? No access
              3. (3) Auswirkung auf den Consent für Widerklagen No access
              1. (1) Funktionsweise der Umbrella Clauses No access
              2. (2) Beschränkung der Reichweite einer Umbrella Clause No access
              3. (3) Widerklage mittels einer Umbrella Clause? No access
            6. ff) Zusammenfassung No access
              1. (1) Zu dem unterschiedlichen Zustandekommen der Schiedsvereinbarung No access
              2. (2) Zu der Auswirkung auf die Beurteilung des Consents über eine Widerklage No access
            2. bb) Extensive Formulierung No access
            3. cc) Restriktive Formulierung No access
            1. aa) Extensive Klauseln No access
            2. bb) Restriktive Klauseln No access
            3. cc) Gemischte Klauseln Typ 1 No access
            4. dd) Gemischte Klauseln Typ 2 No access
          5. e) Zusammenfassung und Fazit No access
          1. a) Die Natur des Consents der Parteien – die Rolle der Annahme des Investors No access
          2. b) Schlichte Annahme des Schiedsangebots No access
          3. c) Schweigen in der Zuständigkeitsphase des Schiedsverfahrens No access
          4. d) Beschränkung der Annahme? No access
          5. e) Erweiterung der Annahme? No access
          6. f) Zusammenfassung No access
          1. a) Das Sondervotum von Reisman im Verfahren Spyridon Roussalis v. Romania – These des impliziten Consents No access
          2. b) Die Aufnahme dieses Gedankengangs in Antoine Goetz & Consorts et S.A. Affinage des Métaux v. République du Burundi No access
            1. aa) Gewährleistung der Sinnhaftigkeit des Artikel 46 des ICSID-Übereinkommens No access
            2. bb) Rechtspolitische Argumente rechtfertigen kein Übergehen des Wortlauts No access
          4. d) Widerspruch in der Entscheidungspraxis: Spyridon Roussalis v. Romania vs. Antoine Goetz & Consorts et S.A. Affinage des Métaux v. République du Burundi? No access
          5. e) Zusammenfassung No access
        5. 5. Zusammenfassung: Consent aus einem BIT No access
          1. a) Funktionsweise der Consentbildung der Parteien No access
          2. b) Risiko der unilateralen Abänderung des Consents des Staates No access
          3. c) Zusammenfassung No access
        2. 2. Auslegung eines auf einem Investitionsgesetz beruhenden Consents No access
          1. a) Typisierung der Schiedsregelungen in nationalen Investitionsgesetzen No access
          2. b) Übertragbarkeit der BIT-bezogenen Ergebnisse No access
        4. 4. Zusammenfassung No access
      4. IV. Ad hoc Consent No access
          1. a) Definition der Staatenimmunität No access
          2. b) Reichweite der Staatenimmunität No access
        2. 2. Widerklagen trotz Staatenimmunität? No access
        3. 3. Analogiemöglichkeit in internationalen Investitionsschiedsverfahren? No access
            1. aa) Der Gleichheitsgrundsatz vor internationalen Organen, insbesondere vor dem Internationalen Gerichtshof No access
            2. bb) Der Gleichheitsgrundsatz vor internationalen Investitionsschiedsgerichten No access
            3. cc) Zusammenfassung No access
            1. aa) Widerklagemöglichkeit als Element des Gleichheitsgrundsatzes No access
            2. bb) Inhärente Befugnisse eines Gerichts in Reaktion auf eine Ungleichbehandlung No access
              1. (1) Keine Anwendbarkeit von inhärenten Befugnissen No access
              2. (2) Keine erhebliche Beeinträchtigung des Gleichheitsgrundsatzes No access
            4. dd) Zusammenfassung No access
          1. a) Definition des Konzepts des Rechtsmissbrauchs No access
          2. b) Konsequenzen rechtsmissbräuchlichen Verhaltens durch Wahrnehmung der inhärenten Befugnisse eines Schiedsgerichts No access
          3. c) Auswirkungen rechtsmissbräuchlichen Verhaltens auf die Widerklagemöglichkeit des Staates? No access
          4. d) Zusammenfassung No access
        3. 3. Zusammenfassung No access
        1. 1. Internationales Investitionsrecht als Ausprägung internationalen Verwaltungsrechts No access
        2. 2. Widerklagemöglichkeit trotz Charakterisierung als internationalisiertes Verwaltungsrecht No access
    2. B. Zusammenfassung: Der Consent der Parteien in Bezug auf Widerklagen des Staates No access
        1. 1. Zeitliche und örtliche Nähe No access
        2. 2. Gleichartigkeit der Tatsachengrundlage No access
        3. 3. Widerklageargumente als Verteidigung? No access
      2. II. Der rechtliche Zusammenhang im Rahmen der Konnexität No access
        1. 1. Der Maßstab in der Rechtsprechung des Internationalen Gerichtshofs No access
        2. 2. Die Reichweite des Ermessens des Internationalen Gerichtshofs No access
      1. I. Klage und Widerklage beruhen auf dem gleichen Vertrag, Geschäft oder Geschehen No access
        1. 1. Widerklage zur Geltendmachung von Steuerforderungen oder Sozialabgaben No access
        2. 2. Widerklage zur Geltendmachung von Zollgebühren No access
      3. III. Zusammenfassung des Bewertungsmaßstabs des Iran-US Claims Tribunals No access
      1. I. Verfahren auf Grundlage eines Investitionsvertrags No access
      2. II. Verfahren auf Grundlage eines bilateralen Investitionsabkommens No access
        1. 1. Charakterisierung der Konnexität als Zuständigkeits- oder Zulässigkeitskriterium? No access
        2. 2. Differenzierung zwischen der Konnexität gemäß Artikel 46 des ICSID-Übereinkommens und dem direkten Zusammenhang gemäß Artikel 25 Absatz 1 des ICSID-Übereinkommens No access
        1. 1. Das Konnexitätskriterium in Verfahren auf Basis eines Investitionsvertrages No access
          1. a) Ist eine Konnexität unter faktischen Gesichtspunkten ausreichend? No access
            1. aa) Problemaufriss durch Folgenbetrachtung No access
            2. bb) Besteht ein grundsätzliches Hindernis gegen die Konnexität bei Widerklagen wegen nationalen Rechts? No access
            1. aa) Beurteilungsansätze in der Literatur No access
            2. bb) Beurteilungsansätze in der weiteren Rechtsprechung zu Artikel 46 des ICSID-Übereinkommens No access
            3. cc) Bewertungsstandard für Konnexität unter rechtlichen Gesichtspunkten No access
          1. a) Der Konnexitätsstandard in Investitionsschiedsverfahren auf Grundlage eines Investitionsvertrages No access
          2. b) Der Konnexitätsstandard in Investitionsschiedsverfahren auf Grundlage eines BITs oder eines nationalen Investitionsgesetzes No access
    1. A. Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit No access
      1. I. Subjektive Reichweite des Consents – Widerklage gegen Dritte? No access
        1. 1. Völkerrechtsfähigkeit des Investors No access
        2. 2. Pflichten des Investors No access
    3. C. Ausblick: Die Widerklage des Staates in Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren No access
  8. Literaturverzeichnis No access 437 - 460
  9. Annex No access 461 - 461

Bibliography (269)

  1. Literaturverzeichnis Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  2. Abel, Patrick, Counterclaims Based on International Human Rights Obligations of Investors in International Investment Arbitration, Brill Open Law, 1 (2018), 61-90 (zitiert: Abel, Counterclaims Based on International Human Rights Obligations of Investors in International Investment Arbitration, 61). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  3. Alba, Mariano de, Drawing the Line: Addressing Allegations of Unclean Hands in Investment Arbitration, Brazilian Journal of International Law, 12 (2015), 322-338 (zitiert: Alba, Drawing the Line: Addressing Allegations of Unclean Hands in Investment Arbitration, 322). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  4. Aldrich, George H., The jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, An analysis of the decisions of the tribunal, Oxford (1996) (zitiert: Aldrich, The jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, An analysis of the decisions of the tribunal, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  5. Alexandrov, Stanimir A., Breaches of Contract and Breaches of Treaty: The Jurisdiction of Treaty-Based Arbitration Tribunals to Decide Breach of Contract Claims in SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, (2004) 5, 555-578 (zitiert: Alexandrov, Breaches of Contract and Breaches of Treaty: The Jurisdiction of Treaty-Based Arbitration Tribunals to Decide Breach of Contract Claims in SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines, 555). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  6. Alvarez, Henri C., Arbitration Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, Arbi¬tration International, 16 (2000) 4, 393-430 (zitiert: H.C. Alvarez, Arbitration Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, 393). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  7. Alvarez, José E., Are Corporations Subjects of International Law, Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 9 (2011) 1, 1-35 (zitiert: J. E. Alvarez, Are Corporations Subjects of International Law, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  8. Alvik, Ivar, Contracting with sovereignty, State contracts and international arbitration, Studies in international law 31, Oxford (2011) (zitiert: Alvik, Contracting with sovereignty, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  9. Amerasinghe, Chittharanjan F., Diplomatic protection, Oxford monographs in international law, Oxford (2008) (zitiert: Amerasinghe, Diplomatic protection, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  10. Amerasinghe, Chittharanjan F., Local remedies in international law, Cambridge studies in international and comparative law 31, New York (2. Aufl. 2004) (zitiert: Amerasinghe, Local remedies in international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  11. Andreeva, Yulia, Interpreting Consent to Arbitration as a Unilateral Act of State: A Case Against Conventions, Arbitration International, 27 (2011) 2, 129-147 (zitiert: Andreeva, Interpreting Consent to Arbitration as a Unilateral Act of State: A Case Against Conventions, 129). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  12. Anning, Molly, The Admissibility of Environmental Counterclaims in Investment Arbi¬tration, Student/Alumni Paper, Victoria University of Wellington (2019) (zitiert: Anning, The Admissibility of Environmental Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  13. Antonopoulos, Constantine, Counterclaims before the International Court of Justice, The Hague (2011) (zitiert: Antonopoulos, Counterclaims before the International Court of Justice, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  14. Anzilotti, Dionisio, La demande reconventionnelle en procédure internationale, Journal du Droit International, 57 (1930) 4, 857-877 (zitiert: Anzilotti, La demande reconventionnelle en procédure internationale, 857). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  15. APEC Committee on Trade and Investment Experts Group, International Investment Agreements Negotiators Handbook, APEC/UNCTAD Modules, APEC#212-CT-03.3 (2012) (zitiert: APEC Committee on Trade and Investment Experts Group, International Investment Agreements Negotiators Handbook, S). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  16. Arcuri, Alessandra, The Great Asymmetry and the Rule of Law in International Investment Arbitration, SSRN Journal (2017), 1-19 (zitiert: Arcuri, The Great Asymmetry and the Rule of Law in International Investment Arbitration, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  17. Ascensio, Hervé, Abuse of Process in International Investment Arbitration, Chinese Journal of International Law, 13 (2014) 4, 763-785 (zitiert: Ascensio, Abuse of Process in International Investment Arbitration, 763). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  18. Asteriti, Alessandra, Environmental Law in Investment Arbitration: Procedural Means of Incorporation, Journal of World Investment & Trade, 16 (2015) 2, 248-273 (zitiert: Asteriti, Environmental Law in Investment Arbitration: Procedural Means of Incorporation, 248). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  19. Atanasova, Dafina/Martínez Benoit, Adrián/Ostřanský, Josef, Counterclaims in Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) under International Investment Agreements (IIAs), Trade and Investment Law Clinic Papers, Centre for Trade and Economic Integration – The Graduate Institute Geneva (2012) (zitiert: Atanasova/Martínez Benoit/Ostřanský, Counterclaims in Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) under International Investment Agreements (IIAs), S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  20. Atanasova, Dafina/Martínez Benoit, Adrián/Ostřanský, Josef, The Legal Framework for Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, Journal of International Arbitration, 31 (2014) 3, 357-391 (zitiert: Atanasova/Martínez Benoit/Ostřanský, The Legal Framework for Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, 357). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  21. Azari, Hadi, La demande reconventionnelle devant la Cour internationale de Justice, zugl. Diss., Paris (2012) (zitiert: Azari, La demande reconventionnelle devant la Cour internationale de Justice, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  22. Azari, Hadi, La demande reconventionnelle devant le Tribunal international du droit de la mer : l’apport de l’ordonnance du 2 novembre 2012 dans l’affaire du Navire Virginia G (Panama/Guinée-Bissau), Annuaire français de droit international, 58 (2012) 1, 471-486 (zitiert: Azari, La demande reconventionnelle devant le Tribunal international du droit de la mer : l’apport de l’ordonnance du 2 novembre 2012 dans l’affaire du Navire Virginia G (Panama/Guinée-Bissau), 471). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  23. Bain, Eve, When Some Are More Equal Than Others: The Need for a More Substantive Conception of "Equality of the Parties" in Investment Arbitration, LL.M Research Paper, Victoria University of Wellington (2017) (zitiert: Bain, When Some Are More Equal Than Others: The Need for a More Substantive Conception of "Equality of the Parties" in Investment Arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  24. Bastid-Burdeau, Geneviève, Nouvelles perspectives pour l'arbitrage dans le contentieux économique intéressant les États, Revue de l'Arbitrage, (1995) 1, 3-38 (zitiert: Bastid-Burdeau, Nouvelles perspectives pour l'arbitrage dans le contentieux économique intéressant les États, 3). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  25. Beale, Joseph H., The Jurisdiction of a Sovereign State, Havard Law Review, 36 (1923) 3, 241-262 (zitiert: Beale, The Jurisdiction of a Sovereign State, 241). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  26. Ben Hamida, Walid, L'arbitrage Etat-investisseur cherche son équilibre perdu : Dans quelle mesure l'Etat peut introduire des demandes reconventionnelles contre l'investisseur privé?, International Law FORUM du droit international, 7 (2005) 4, 261-272 (zitiert: Ben Hamida, L'arbitrage Etat-investisseur cherche son équilibre perdu : Dans quelle mesure l'Etat peut introduire des demandes reconventionnelles contre l'investisseur privé?, 261). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  27. Ben Hamida, Walid, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles dans la Jurisprudence Arbitrale Récente Relative aux Investissements, Revista Brasileira de Arbitragem, 10 (2013) 37, 68-80 (zitiert: Ben Hamida, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles dans la Jurisprudence Arbitrale Récente Relative aux Investissements, 68). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  28. Berger, Klaus P., Set-Off in International Economic Arbitration, Arbitration Internatio¬nal, 15 (1999) 1, 53-84 (zitiert: Berger, Set-Off in International Economic Arbitration, 53). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  29. Besson, Sébastien, Piercing the Corporate Veil: Back on the Right Track, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd. 7, New York/Paris (2010), 147-159 (zitiert: Besson, Piercing the Corporate Veil: Back on the Right Track, 147). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  30. Bishop, Raymond D./Crawford, James/Reisman, William M., Foreign investment disputes, Cases, Materials and Commentary, The Hague (2. Aufl.2014) (zitiert: Bishop/J. Crawford/Reisman, Foreign investment disputes, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  31. Bjorklund, Andrea K., The Role of Counterclaims in Rebalancing Investment Law, Lewis & Clark Law Review, 17 (2013) 2, 461-480 (zitiert: Bjorklund, The Role of Counterclaims in Rebalancing Investment Law, 461). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  32. Black, Henry C., A dictionary of law, Containing definitions of the terms and phrases of American and English jurisprudence, ancient and modern; including the principal terms of international, constitutional, and commercial law; with a collection of legal maxims and numerous select titles from the civil law and other foreign systems, Buffalo/St. Paul (1891) (zitiert: Black, A dictionary of law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  33. Böckstiegel, Karl-Heinz, Enterprise v. State: the New David and Goliath?, Arbitration International, 23 (2007) 1, 93-104 (zitiert: Böckstiegel, Enterprise v. State: the New David and Goliath?, 93). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  34. Borchard, Edwin, The diplomatic protection of citizens abroad or the law of international claims, New York (1915) (zitiert: Borchard, The diplomatic protection of citizens abroad or the law of international claims, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  35. Born, Gary, International commercial arbitration, New York/Alphen aan den Rijn (3. Aufl. 2021) (zitiert: Born, International commercial arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  36. Brabandere, Eric de, 'Good Faith', 'Abuse of Process' and the Initiation of Investment Treaty Claims, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 3 (2012) 3, 609-636 (zitiert: Brabandere, 'Good Faith', 'Abuse of Process' and the Initiation of Investment Treaty Claims, 609) Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  37. Brabandere, Eric de, Individuals in Advisory Proceedings Before the International Court of Justice: Equality of the Parties and the Court’s Discretionary Authority, Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 11 (2012) 2, 253-279 (zitiert: Brabandere, Individuals in Advisory Proceedings Before the International Court of Justice: Equality of the Parties and the Court’s Discretionary Authority, 253). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  38. Braun, Tillmann R., Ausprägungen der Globalisierung: Der Investor als partielles Subjekt im Internationalen Investitionsrecht, Qualität und Grenzen dieser Wirkungseinheit, zugl. Diss., Köln (2011), Schriftenreihe des International Investment Law Centre Cologne (IILCC) 3, Zürich u.a. (2012) (zitiert: Braun, Ausprägungen der Globalisierung: Der Investor als partielles Subjekt im Internationalen Investitionsrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  39. Bravin, Mark N./Kaplan, Alex B., Arbitrating Closely Related Counterclaims at ICSID in the Wake of Spyridon Roussalis v. Romania, Yearbook on International Arbitration, 3 (2018), 185-198 (zitiert: Bravin/Kaplan, Arbitrating Closely Related Counterclaims at ICSID in the Wake of Spyridon Roussalis v. Romania, 185). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  40. Briercliffe, Naomi, Holding investors to account for human rights violations through counterclaims in investment treaty arbitration, Practical Law Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/holding-investors-to-account-for-human-rights-violations-through-counterclaims-in-investment-treaty-arbitration/ (30. Januar 2017), zuletzt abgerufen am 28. April 2024 (zitiert: Briercliffe, Holding investors to account for human rights violations through counterclaims in investment treaty arbitration). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  41. Brower, Charles N./Schill, Stephan W., Is Arbitration a Threat or a Boom to the Legiti¬macy of International Investment Law, Chicago Journal of International Law, 9 (2009) 2, 471-498 (zitiert: Brower/Schill, Is Arbitration a Threat or a Boom to the Legitimacy of International Investment Law, 471). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  42. Bubrowski, Helene, Balancing IIA arbitration through the use of counterclaims, in: Armand de Mestral, Céline Lévesque (Hrsg.), Improving International Investment Agreements, Routledge Research in International Economic Law, Hoboken (2013), 212-229 (zitiert: Bubrowski, Balancing IIA arbitration through the use of counterclaims, 212). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  43. Burda, Julien, Le consentement aux demandes reconventionnelles dans le cadre du CIRDI à la lumière de la sentence Spyridon Roussalis contre Roumanie, Revue d'arbitrage et de médiation, 3 (2013) 1, 27-51 (zitiert: Burda, Le consentement aux demandes reconventionnelles dans le cadre du CIRDI à la lumière de la sentence Spyridon Roussalis contre Roumanie, 27). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  44. Burova, Elena, Jurisdiction of Investment Tribunals Over Host States’ Counterclaims: Wind of Change?, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2017/03/06/jurisdiction-of-investment-tribunals-over-host-states-counterclaims-wind-of-change/ (März 2017), zuletzt abgerufen am 28. April 2024 (zitiert: Burova, Jurisdiction of Investment Tribunals Over Host States’ Counterclaims: Wind of Change?). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  45. Calvo, Carlos, Dictionnaire de droit international public et privé, Berlin/Paris (1885) (zitiert: Calvo, Dictionnaire de droit international public et privé, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  46. Carducci, Guido, Dealing with set-off and counterclaims in international commercial and investment arbitration, Yearbook on International Arbitration, 3 (2013), 173-184 (zitiert: Carducci, Dealing with set-off and counterclaims in international commercial and investment arbitration, 173). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  47. Carlston, Kenneth S., The process of international arbitration, New York (1946) (zitiert: Carlston, The process of international arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  48. Caron, David D., The Interpretation of National Foreign Investment Laws as Unilateral Acts Under International Law, Chapter 34, in: Mahnoush H. Arsanjani (Hrsg.), Looking to the future, Essays on international law in honor of W. Michael Reisman, Leiden (2011), 649-674 (zitiert: Caron, The Interpretation of National Foreign Investment Laws as Unilateral Acts Under International Law, 649). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  49. Chaisse, Julien, The Treaty Shopping Practice: Corporate Structuring and Restructuring to Gain Access to Investment Treaties and Arbitration, Hastings Business Law Journal, 11 (2015) 2, 225-305 (zitiert: Chaisse, The Treaty Shopping Practice: Corporate Structuring and Restructuring to Gain Access to Investment Treaties and Arbitration), 225. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  50. Chan, Alexsia T./Crawford, Beverly K., The puzzle of public opposition to TTIP in Germany, Business and Politics, 19 (2017) 4, 683-708 (zitiert: Chan/B. K. Crawford, The puzzle of public opposition to TTIP in Germany, 683). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  51. Cheng, Bin, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, Grotius classic reprint series 2, Cambridge (2006) (zitiert: Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  52. Cheng-Han, Tan/Wang, Jiangyu/Hofmann, Christian, Piercing the Corporate Veil: Historical, Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives, Berkeley Business Law Journal, 16 (2019) 1, 140-204 (zitiert: Cheng-Han/Wang/Hofmann, Piercing the Corporate Veil: Historical, Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives, 140). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  53. Chigara, Ben, The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and Customary International Law, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, 22 (2000) 4, 433-452 (zitiert: Chigara, The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and Customary International Law, 433). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  54. Choudhury, Barnali, Investor Obligations for Human Rights, ICSID Review, 35 (2021) 1-2, 82-104 (zitiert: Choudhury, Investor Obligations for Human Rights, 82). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  55. Clarke, R. Floyd, Intervention for Breach of Contract or Tort Committed by a Sovereignty, Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at Its Annual Meeting (1907-1917), 4 (1910), 149-192 (zitiert: Clarke, Intervention for Breach of Contract or Tort Committed by a Sovereignty, 149). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  56. Cohen Smutney, Abby/Polášek, Petr, Unlawful or Bad Faith Conduct as a Bar to Claims in Investment Arbitration, in: Jacques Werner (Hrsg.), A liber amicorum: Thomas Wälde, Law beyond conventional thought, Cameron May International Law & Policy, London (2009), 277-296 (zitiert: Cohen Smutney/Polášek, Unlawful or Bad Faith Conduct as a Bar to Claims in Investment Arbitration, 277). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  57. Crawford, James, Brownlie's principles of public international law, Oxford (9. Aufl. 2019) (zitiert: J. Crawford, Brownlie's principles of public international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  58. Crawford, James, Treaty and Contract in Investment Arbitration, Arbitration International, 24 (2008) 3, 351-374 (zitiert: J. Crawford, Treaty and Contract in Investment Arbitration, 351). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  59. Crow, Kevin/Lorenzoni Escobar, Lina, International Corporate Obligations, Human Rights, And The Urbaser Standard: Breaking New Ground, Boston University International Law Journal, 36 (2018), 87-118 (zitiert: Crow/Lorenzoni Escobar, International Corporate Obligations, Human Rights, And The Urbaser Standard: Breaking New Ground, 87). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  60. Daillier, Patrick/Benlolo, Myriam/Dumée, Marie/Robert, Anne/Müller, Daniel, Tribunal irano-américain de réclamations, Annuaire français de droit international, 46 (2000) 1, 326-379, (zitiert: Daillier et al., Tribunal irano-américain de réclamations, 326). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  61. Dalhuisen, Jan H./Guzman, Andrew T., The Applicable Law in Foreign Investment Disputes, SSRN Electronic Journal (2013), 1-16 (zitiert: Dalhuisen/Guzman, The Applicable Law in Foreign Investment Disputes, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  62. del Rosal Carmona, Rafael C., A Counterclaim for the Investor's Breach of International Human Rights Obligations?, An Overview of Urbaser v. Argentina, Spain Arbitration Review/Revista del Club Español del Arbitraje, (2017) 30, 141-151 (zitiert: del Rosal Carmona, A Counterclaim for the Investor's Breach of International Human Rights Obligations?, An Overview of Urbaser v. Argentina, 141). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  63. Delaume, Georges R., Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, The International Lawyer, 1 (1966) 1, 64-80 (zitiert: Delaume, Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, 64). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  64. Derains, Yves, Is there A Group of Companies Doctrine?, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd. 7, New York/Paris (2010), 131-145 (zitiert: Derains, Is there A Group of Companies Doctrine?, 131). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  65. Dodge, William S., Breaking the public law taboo, Harvard International Law Journal, 43 (2002) 1, 161-236 (zitiert: Dodge, Breaking the public law taboo, 161). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  66. Dolzer, Rudolf/Schreuer, Christoph, Principles of international investment law, Oxford (2. Aufl., 2012) (zitiert: Dolzer/Schreuer, Principles of international investment law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  67. Dolzer, Rudolf/Stevens, Margrete, Bilateral investment treaties, Norwell/The Hague (1995) (zitiert: Dolzer/Stevens, Bilateral investment treaties, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  68. Dörr, Oliver/Schmalenbach, Kirsten (Hrsg.), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, A commentary, Berlin (2. Aufl. 2018) (zitiert: Dörr/Schmalenbach/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  69. Douglas, Zachary, The enforcement of environmental norms in investment treaty arbitration, in: Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Jorge E. Viñuales (Hrsg.), Harnessing Foreign Investment to Promote Environmental Protection, Incentives and Safeguards, Cambridge (2013), 415-444 (zitiert: Douglas, The enforcement of environmental norms in investment treaty arbitration, 415). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  70. Douglas, Zachary, The international law of investment claims, Cambridge (2009) (zi¬tiert: Douglas, The international law of investment claims, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  71. Dudas, Stefan, Treaty Counterclaims under the ICSID Convention, in: Crina Baltag (Hrsg.), ICSID Convention after 50 years, Unsettled issues, Alphen aan den Rijn (2017), 385-406 (zitiert: Dudas, Treaty Counterclaims under the ICSID Convention, 385). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  72. Dudas, Stefan/Tsolakidis, Nikolaos, Host-State Counterclaims: A Remedy for Fraud or Corruption in Investment-Treaty Arbitration?, Transnational Dispute Management, 10 (2013) 3, 1-24 (zitiert: Dudas/Tsolakidis, Host-State Counterclaims: A Remedy for Fraud or Corruption in Investment-Treaty Arbitration?, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  73. Dumberry, Patrick, State of Confusion: The Doctrine of ‘Clean Hands’ in Investment Arbitration After the Yukos Award, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 17 (2016), 229-259 (zitiert: Dumberry, State of Confusion: The Doctrine of ‘Clean Hands’ in Investment Arbitration After the Yukos Award, 229). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  74. Eagleton, Clyde, The responsibility of states in international law, New York (1970) (zitiert: Eagleton, The responsibility of states in international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  75. Easterbrook, Frank H./Fischel, Daniel R., Limited Liability and the Corporation, University of Chicago Law Review, 52 (1985), 89-117 (zitiert: Easterbrook/Fischel, Li¬mited Liability and the Corporation, 89). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  76. Eberhardt, Pia/Olivet, Cecilia, Profiting from Injustice, How law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fuelling an investment arbitration boom, Corporate Europe Observa¬tory and the Transnational Institute (2012) (zitiert: Eberhardt/Olivet, Profiting from Injustice). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  77. Fach Gómez, Katia, Latin America and ICSID: David versus Goliath?, Law and Business Review of the Americas, 17 (2011) 2, 195-230 (zitiert: Fach Gómez, Latin America and ICSID: David versus Goliath?, 195). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  78. Farmer, Kelsey, The Best Defence is a Good Offense - State Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, LL.M Research Paper, Victoria University of Wellington (2016) (zitiert: Farmer, The Best Defence is a Good Offense - State Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  79. Fitzmaurice, Gerald, Hersch Lauterpacht - The Scholar as Judge, Part I, British Yearbook of International Law, 37 (1961), 1-71 (zitiert: Fitzmaurice, Hersch Lauterpacht - The Scholar as Judge, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  80. Footer, Mary E., BITs and Pieces: Social and Environmental Protection in the Regulation of Foreign Investment, Michigan State University College of Law Journal of International Law, 18 (2009) 1, 33-64 (zitiert: Footer, BITs and Pieces: Social and Environmental Protection in the Regulation of Foreign Investment, 33). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  81. Foster, George K., Balancing Investor Protections, the Environment, and Human Rights, Investors, States, and Stakeholders: Power Asymmetries in International Investment and the Stabilizing Potential of Investment Treaties, Lewis & Clark Law Review, 17 (2013) 2, 361-421 (zitiert: Foster, Balancing Investor Protections, the Environment, and Human Rights, 361). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  82. Fouchard, Philippe/Gaillard, Emmanuel/Goldman, Berthold/Savage, John, Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on international commercial arbitration, The Hague (1999) (zi¬tiert: Fouchard et al., Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on international commercial arbi¬tration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  83. Franck, Susan D., The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review, 73 (2005) 4, 1521-1625 (zitiert: Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, 1521). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  84. Fukunaga, Yuka, Abuse of Process under International Law and Investment Arbitration, ICSID Review, 33 (2018) 1, 181-211 (zitiert: Fukunaga, Abuse of Process under International Law and Investment Arbitration, 181). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  85. Gaeta, Paola/Viñuales, Jorge E./Zappalà, Salvatore, Cassesse's International Law, Oxford (3. Aufl., 2020) (zitiert: Gaeta/Viñuales/Zappalà, Cassesse's International Law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  86. Gaffney, John P., 'Abuse of Process' in Investment Treaty Arbitration, Journal of World Investment & Trade, 11 (2010) 4, 515-538 (zitiert: Gaffney, 'Abuse of Process' in Investment Treaty Arbitration, 515). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  87. Gaillard, Emmanuel, Abuse of Process in International Arbitration, ICSID Review, 32 (2017) 1, 17-37 (zitiert: Gaillard, Abuse of Process in International Arbitration, 17). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  88. Gardiner, Richard K., Treaty interpretation, The Oxford international law library, Oxford (2. Aufl. 2017) (zitiert: Gardiner, Treaty interpretation, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  89. Genet, Raoul, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles et la Procédure de la Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale, Revue du Droit International et de la Législation Comparée, 19 (troisième série) (1938) 1, 145-178 (zitiert: Genet, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles et la Procédure de la Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale, 145). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  90. Giorgetti, Chiara, A Common Code of Conduct for Investment Arbitrators?, American Society of International Law, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting 2019, 113 (2019), 217-219 (zitiert: Giorgetti, A Common Code of Conduct for Investment Arbitrators?, 217). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  91. Gleason, Ted, Examining host-State counterclaims for environmental damage in investor-State dispute settlement from human rights and transnational public policy perspectives, International Environmental Agreements, Politics, Law and Econo¬mics, 21 (2021) (3), 427-444 (zitiert: Gleason, Examining host-State counterclaims for environmental damage in investor-State dispute settlement from human rights and transnational public policy perspectives, 427). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  92. Gouiffès, Laurent/Ordonez, Melissa, Jurisdiction and admissibility: are we any closer to a line in the sand?, Arbitration International, 31 (2015) 1, 107 122 (zitiert: Gouiffès/Ordonez, Jurisdiction and admissibility: are we any closer to a line in the sand?, 107). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  93. Grabenwarter, Christoph/Pabel, Katharina, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, Ein Studienbuch, München u.a. (6. Aufl. 2019) (zitiert: Grabenwarter/Pabel, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  94. Greenberg, Simon/Feris, José Ricardo/Albanesi, Christian, Consolidation, Joinder, Cross-Claims, Multiparty and Multicontract Arbitrations: Recent ICC Experience, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd. 7, New York/Paris (2010) 161-182 (zitiert: Greenberg/Feris/Albanesi, Consolidation, Joinder, Cross-Claims, Multiparty and Multicontract Arbitrations: Recent ICC Experience, 161). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  95. Griebel, Jörn, Die Einbeziehung von "contract claims" in internationale Investitionsstreitigkeiten über Streitbeilegungsklauseln in Investitionsschutzabkommen, SchiedsVZ (2006), 306-311 (zitiert: Griebel, Die Einbeziehung von "contract claims" in internationale Investitionsstreitigkeiten über Streitbeilegungsklauseln in Investi¬tionsschutzabkommen, 306). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  96. Griebel, Jörn, Internationales Investitionsrecht, Lehrbuch für Studium und Praxis, München (2008) (zitiert: Griebel, Internationales Investitionsrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  97. Grossman, Nienke, The Normative Legitimacy of International Courts, Temple Law Review, 86 (2013) 2, 61-106 (zitiert: Grossman, The Normative Legitimacy of International Courts, 61). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  98. Halpern, Michaela, Corruption as a Complete Defense in Investment Arbitration or Part of a Balance, Williamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution, 23 (2016) 2, 297-318 (zitiert: M. Halpern, Corruption as a Complete Defense in Investment Arbitration or Part of a Balance, 297). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  99. Halpern, Paul/Trebilcock, Michael/Turnbull, Stuart, An Economic Analysis of Limited Liability in Corporation Law, The University of Toronto Law Journal, 30 (1980) 2, 117-150 (zitiert: Halpern/Trebilcock/Turnbull, An Economic Analysis of Limited Liability in Corporation Law, 117). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  100. Hanessian, Grant/Duggal, Kabir, The Final 2015 Indian Model BIT: Is This the Change the World Wishes to See?, ICSID Review, 32 (2017) 1, 216-226 (zitiert: H⁠a⁠n⁠e⁠s⁠s⁠i⁠a⁠n/Duggal, The Final 2015 Indian Model BIT: Is This the Change the World Wishes to See?, 216). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  101. Hanotiau, Bernard, Complex - Multicontract-Multiparty - Arbitrations, Arbitration International, 14 (1998) 4, 369-394 (zitiert: Hanotiau, Complex - Multicontract-Multiparty - Arbitrations, 369). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  102. Hanotiau, Bernard, Complex arbitrations, Multiparty, multicontract, multi-issue and class actions, International arbitration law library 14, New York/The Hague (2006) (zitiert: Hanotiau, Complex arbitrations, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  103. Hanotiau, Bernard, Consent to Arbitration: Do we share a common vision?, Arbitration International, 27 (2011) 4, 539-554 (zitiert: Hanotiau, Consent to Arbitration: Do we share a common vision?, 539). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  104. Haugeneder, Florian, Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration, Journal of World Investment & Trade, 10 (2009) 3, 323-340 (zitiert: Haugeneder, Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration, 323). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  105. Heiskanen, Veijo, Ménage à trois? Jurisdiction, Admissibility and Competence in Investment Treaty Arbitration, ICSID Review, 29 (2014) 1, 231-246 (zitiert: Heiskanen, Ménage à trois? Jurisdiction, Admissibility and Competence in Investment Treaty Arbitration, 231). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  106. Herdegen, Matthias, Völkerrecht, § 37. Statenimmunität, Grundrisse des Rechts, München (19. Aufl. 2020) (zitiert: Herdegen, Völkerrecht, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  107. Hilpold, Peter, Maßnahmen zur effektiven Durchsetzung von Menschen- und Arbeitsrechten, Völkerrechtliche Anforderungen, in: Unternehmensverantwortung und Internationales Recht, Heidelberg 2020, S. 185-228 (zitiert: Hilpold, Maßnahmen zur effektiven Durchsetzung von Menschen- und Arbeitsrechten, 185). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  108. Hobe, Stephan, Einführung in das Völkerrecht, Politische Wissenschaft 469, Tübingen (11. Aufl. 2020) (zitiert: Hobe, Einführung in das Völkerrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  109. Hobér, Kaj, Investment Treaty Arbitration and Its Future -- If Any, Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation, 7 (2015), 58-65 (zitiert: Hobér, Investment Treaty Arbitration and Its Future -- If Any, 58). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  110. Hoffmann, Anne K., Counterclaims, in: Meg Kinnear, Geraldine Fischer, Jara Minguez Almeida et al. (Hrsg.), Building international investment law, The first 50 years of ICSID, New York/Alphen aan den Rjin (2015), 505 520 (zitiert: Hoffmann, Counterclaims, 505). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  111. Hoffmann, Anne K., Counterclaims by the respondent state in investment arbitration, The decision on jurisdiction over Respondent's counterclaim in Saluka Investments B.V. v. Czech Republic, SchiedsVZ (2006), 317-320 (zitiert: Hoffmann, Counterclaims by the respondent state in investment arbitration, The decision on jurisdiction over Respondent's counterclaim in Saluka Investments B.V. v. Czech Republic, 317). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  112. Hoffmann, Anne K., Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration, ICSID Review, 28 (2013) 2, 438-453 (zitiert: Hoffmann, Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration, 438). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  113. Huber, Stefan, Die Stellung von Unternehmen in der Investitionsschiedsgerichtsbarkeit (unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Korruptionsproblemen), Unternehmen als gleichberechtigte Verfahrensparteien?, in: Unternehmensverantwortung und Internationales Recht, Heidelberg 2020, S. 303-338 (zitiert: Huber, Die Stellung von Unternehmen in der Investitionsschiedsgerichtsbarkeit (unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Korruptionsproblemen), 303). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  114. Hudson, Manley O., La Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale, Traité, Paris (1936) (zitiert: Hudson, La Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  115. ICSID, History of the ICSID Convention, Documents Concerning the Origin and the Formulation of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, II-1 Documents 1-43 (zitiert: ICSID, History of the ICSID Convention, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  116. ICSID, Regulations and Rules 1968, 1 ICSID Review (zitiert: ICSID, Regulations and Rules 1968). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  117. Institut de Droit International, Equality of Parties before International Investment Tribunals, 18ème commission - Rapporteur Campbell McLachlan, 409-618 (zitiert: Institut de Droit International, Equality of Parties before International Investment Tribunals, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  118. Ipsen, Knut/Heintze, Hans-Joachim, Völkerrecht, Ein Studienbuch, München (7. Aufl. 2018) (zitiert: Ipsen/Heintze, Völkerrecht, S). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  119. Ishikawa, Tomoko, Case Comment - Marco Gavazzi and Stefano Gavazzi v. Romania, A New Approach to Determining Jurisdiction over Counterclaims in ICSID Arbitration?, ICSID Review, 32 (2017) 3, 721-728 (zitiert: Ishikawa, Case Comment - Marco Gavazzi and Stefano Gavazzi v. Romania, 721). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  120. Ishikawa, Tomoko, Counterclaims and the rule of law in investment arbitration, American Journal of International Law, 113 (2019), 33-37 (zitiert: Ishikawa, Counterclaims and the rule of law in investment arbitration, 33). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  121. Jain, Abhimanyu G., Consent to counterclaims in investor-state arbitration: a post-Roussalis analysis, International Law Arbitration Review, 16 (2013) 5, 135-147 (z⁠i⁠t⁠i⁠e⁠r⁠t⁠: Jain, Consent to counterclaims in investor-state arbitration: a post-Roussalis analy¬sis, 135). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  122. Janeba, Eckhard, Regulatory chill and the effect of investor state dispute settlements, Review of International Economics, 27 (2019) 4, 1172-1198 (zitiert: Janeba, Regulatory chill and the effect of investor state dispute settlements, 1172). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  123. Kalicki, Jean E., Counterclaims by States in Investment Arbitration, Investment Treaty News Quarterly, 3 (2013) 2, 3-4 (zitiert: Kalicki, Counterclaims by States in Investment Arbitration, 3). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  124. Kalicki, Jean E./Silberman, Mallory B., Case Comment: Spyridon Roussalis v Romania, ICSID Review, 27 (2012) 1, 9-15 (zitiert: Kalicki/Silberman, Case Comment: Spyridon Roussalis v Romania, 9). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  125. Karrer, Pierre A., Jurisdiction on set-off defences and counterclaims, Arbitration, 67 (2001) 2, 176-178 (zitiert: Karrer, Jurisdiction on set-off defences and counterclaims, 176). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  126. Kempen, Bernhard/Hillgruber, Christian, Völkerrecht, JuS-Schriftenreihe Studium 182, München (3. Aufl. 2021) (zitiert: Kempen/Hillgruber, Völkerrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  127. Kendra, Thomas, State Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration - A New Lease of Life?, Arbitration International, 29 (2013) 4, 575-606 (zitiert: Kendra, State Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration - A New Lease of Life?, 575). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  128. Khosa, Ivan Singh/Khanna, Parul, Arbitral Estoppel as an Alternative to the ‘Group of Companies’ Doctrine: The U.S. Approach, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, 35 (2017) 6, 83-86 (zitiert: Khosa/Khanna, Arbitral Estoppel as an Alternative to the ‘Group of Companies’ Doctrine: The U.S. Approach, 83). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  129. Kirchbach, Cornelia, Das Recht auf gesundheitliche Regulierung im Investitionsschiedsverfahrensrecht, Dargestellt am Beispiel von Philip Morris v. Uruguay, zugl. Diss., Frankfurt a.M. (2019), Baden-Baden (2019) (zitiert: Kirchbach, Das Recht auf gesundheitliche Regulierung im Investitionsschiedsverfahrensrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  130. Kjos, Hege E., Applicable law in investor-state arbitration, The interplay between national and international law, Oxford monographs in international law, Oxford (2013) (zitiert: Kjos, Applicable law in investor-state arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  131. Kjos, Hege E., Counter-claims by Host-States in Investment Dispute Arbitration "without privity", in: Philippe Kahn (Hrsg.), Les aspects nouveaux du droit des investissements internationaux, New aspects of international investment law, Leiden (2007), 597-628 (zitiert: Kjos, Counter-claims by Host-States in Investment Dispute Arbitration "without privity", 597). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  132. Klabbers, Jan, Virtuous interpretation, in: Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Olufemi Elias, Panos Merkouris (Hrsg.), Treaty interpretation and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: 30 years on, Leiden u.a. (2010), 17-37 (zitiert: Klabbers, Virtuous interpretation, 17). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  133. Kleinschmidt, Jens, Die Widerklage gegen einen Dritten im Schiedsverfahren, S⁠c⁠h⁠i⁠e⁠d⁠s⁠V⁠Z (2006), 142-150 (zitiert: Kleinschmidt, Die Widerklage gegen einen Dritten im Schiedsverfahren, 142). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  134. Kolb, Robert, The International Court of Justice, Oxford (2013) (zitiert: Kolb, The International Court of Justice, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  135. Kolb, Robert/Oliveira, Thiago B. J., The Elgar companion to the International Court of Justice, Elgar companions to the international courts and tribunals, Cheltenham/Northampton (2016) (zitiert: Kolb/Oliveira, The Elgar companion to the International Court of Justice, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  136. Krüger, Wolfgang/Rauscher, Thomas (Hrsg.), Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung, mit Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, München (6. Aufl. 2020) (zitiert: MüKo ZPO/Bearbeiter bzw. MüKo GVG/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  137. Kryvoi, Yarik, Counterclaims in Investor-State Arbitration, Minnesota Journal of International Law, 21 (2012) 2, 126-252 (zitiert: Kryvoi, Counterclaims in Investor-State Arbitration, 126). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  138. Kryvoi, Yarik, Piercing the Corporate Veil in International Arbitration, The Global Business Law Review 21 (2011) 2, 169-186 (zitiert: Kryvoi, Piercing the Corporate Veil in International Arbitration, 169). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  139. Kryvoi, Yarik, The Path of Investor-State Disputes: From Compensation Commissions to Arbitral Institutions, ICSID Review, 33 (2018) 3, 743-765 (zitiert: Kryvoi, The Path of Investor-State Disputes: From Compensation Commissions to Arbitral Institutions, 743). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  140. Laborde, Gustavo, The Case for Host State Claims in Investment Arbitration, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 1 (2010) 1, 97-122 (zitiert: Laborde, The Case for Host State Claims in Investment Arbitration, 97). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  141. Lalive, Pierre/Halonen, Laura, On the Availability of Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, Czech Yearbook of International Law, 2 (2011), 141-156 (zitiert: Lalive/Halonen, On the Availability of Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration, 141). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  142. Lang, Andrew, The Role of the International Court of Justice in a Context of Fragmentation, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 62 (2013) 4, 777-812 (zitiert: Lang, The Role of the International Court of Justice in a Context of Fragmentation, 777). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  143. Langford, Malcolm/Behn, Daniel, Managing Backlash: The Evolving Investment Treaty Arbitrator?, European Journal of International Law, 29 (2018) 2, 551-580 (zitiert: Langford/Behn, Managing Backlash: The Evolving Investment Treaty Arbitrator?, 551). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  144. Langford, Malcolm/Behn, Daniel/Lie, Runar Hilleren, The Revolving Door in International Investment Arbitration, Journal of International Economic Law, 20 (2017) 2, 301-332 (zitiert: Langford/Behn/Lie, The Revolving Door in International Investment Arbitration, 301). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  145. Larschan, Bradley/Mirfendereski, Guive, The Status of Counterclaims in International Law, with Particular Reference to International Arbitration Involving a Private Party, Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, 15 (1986) 1, 11-48 (zitiert: Larschan/Mirfendereski, The Status of Counterclaims in International Law, with Particular Reference to International Arbitration Involving a Private Party, 11). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  146. Lauterpacht, Hersch, Private law sources and analogies of international law, With special reference to international arbitration, Contributions to international law and diplomacy 6, London (1927) (zitiert: Lauterpacht, Private law sources and analogies of international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  147. Leben, Charles, Advancement of international law, French studies in international law 3, Oxford (2010) (zitiert: Leben, Advancement of international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  148. Lee, John, Resolving Concerns of Treaty Shopping in International Investment Arbitration, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 6 (2015) 2, 355 379 (zitiert: Lee, Resolving Concerns of Treaty Shopping in International Investment Arbitration, 355). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  149. Leikin, Eric/Gadodia, Stuti/Loudon, Charles, The State Doesn't Strike Back After All: India's Final Model BIT Takes the Bite out of Investor Obligations and Eliminates State Counterclaims, Transnational Dispute Management, 15 (2018) 2, 1-22 (zitiert: Leikin/Gadodia/Loudon, The State Doesn't Strike Back After All: India's Final Model BIT Takes the Bite out of Investor Obligations and Eliminates State Counterclaims, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  150. Lemaire, Sophie, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles de l'Etat, Chronique de jurisprudence arbitrale en droit des investissements, Revue de l'Arbitrage, 2017 (2), 682-698 (zitiert: Lemaire, Les Demandes Reconventionnelles de l'Etat, 682). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  151. LeMoullec, Caroline, The Clean Hands Doctrine: A Tool for Accountability of Investor Conduct and Inadmissibility of Investment Claims, Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, 84 (2018) 1, 13-37 (zi¬tiert: LeMoullec, The Clean Hands Doctrine: A Tool for Accountability of Investor Conduct and Inadmissibility of Investment Claims, 13). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  152. Linderfalk, Ulf, Case Comment: International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Tribunal, Spyridon Roussalis v Romania, decision of 7 December 2011, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 62 (2013) 1, 241-250 (zitiert: Linderfalk, Case Comment: International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Tribunal, Spyridon Roussalis v Romania, 241). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  153. Llamzon, Aloysius P., Corruption in international investment arbitration, zugl. Diss., New Haven (2014), Oxford international arbitration series, Oxford (2014) (zitiert: Llamzon, Corruption in international investment arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  154. Lopes Pegna, Olivia, Counter-claims and Obligations Erga Omnes before the International Court of Justice, European Journal of International Law, 9 (1998), 724-736 (zitiert: Lopes Pegna, Counter-claims and Obligations Erga Omnes before the International Court of Justice, 724). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  155. Lünsmann, Jesper, Unilateraler "Consent" im System der Streitbeilegung nach der ICSID Konvention, "Consent" als Voraussetzung der "jurisdiction of the Centre", zugl. Diss., Köln (2016), Studien zum Internationalen Investitionsrecht - Studies in International Investment Law 24, Baden-Baden (2017) (zitiert: Lünsmann, Unilateraler "Consent" im System der Streitbeilegung nach der ICSID Konvention, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  156. Maiwald, Beate, Das Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Seine Rechtsgrundlagen und seine völkerrechtliche, prozeßrechtliche und wirtschaftsrechtliche Rechtsprechungspraxis, zugl. Diss., Köln (1987) (zitiert: Maiwald, Das Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  157. Mangoldt, Hans von/Starck, Christian/Klein, Friedrich, Grundgesetz, Kommentar, München (7. Aufl. 2018) (zitiert: Mangoldt/Starck/Klein/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  158. Mani, V. S., International adjudication, Procedural aspects, Developments in international law 4, The Hague (1980) (zitiert: Mani, International adjudication, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  159. Mann, Frederick A., British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, The British Yearbook of International Law, 52 (1982), 241 254 (zitiert: Mann, British Treaties for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, 241). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  160. Marceddu, Maria Laura/Ortolani, Pietro, What Is Wrong with Investment Arbitration? Evidence from a Set of Behavioural Experiments, European Journal of Internatio¬nal Law, 31 (2020) 2, 405-428 (zitiert: Marceddu/Ortolani, What Is Wrong with Investment Arbitration? Evidence from a Set of Behavioural Experiments, European Journal of International Law, 405). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  161. Marjosola, Heikki, Public/Private Conflict in Investment Treaty Arbitration - a Study on Umbrella Clauses, Helsinki Law Review, (2009), 103-134 (zitiert: Marjosola, Public/Private Conflict in Investment Treaty Arbitration - a Study on Umbrella Clauses, 103). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  162. Maunz, Theodor/Dürig, Günter, Grundgesetz, Kommentar, München (94. EL 2021) (zitiert: Maunz/Dürig/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  163. McLachlan, Campbell/Shore, Laurence/Weiniger, Matthew, International investment arbitration, Substantive principles, Oxford international arbitration series, Oxford (2. Aufl. 2017) (zitiert: McLachlan/Shore/Weiniger, International investment arbitration, S). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  164. Meschede, Katrin, Die Schutzwirkung von umbrella clauses für Investor-Staat-Verträge, zugl. Diss., Köln (2013), Baden-Baden u.a. (2014) (zitiert: Meschede, Die Schutzwirkung von umbrella clauses für Investor-Staat-Verträge, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  165. Miles, Kate, The origins of international investment law, Empire, environment, and the safeguarding of capital, Cambridge studies in international and comparative law 99, Cambridge (2013) (zitiert: Miles, The origins of international investment law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  166. Mourre, Alexis, The Set-off Paradox in International Arbitration, Arbitration International, 24 (2008) 3, 387-404 (zitiert: Mourre, The Set-off Paradox in International Arbitration, 387). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  167. Muchlinski, Peter T., The Diplomatic Protection of Foreign Investors: a Tale of Judicial Caution, in: Christina Binder, Ursula Kriebaum, August Reinisch et al. (Hrsg.), International investment law for the 21st century, Essays in honour of Christoph Schreuer, Oxford (2009), 341-362 (zitiert: Muchlinski, The Diplomatic Protection of Foreign Investors: a Tale of Judicial Caution, 341). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  168. Nanteuil, Arnaud de, Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Old Questions, New Answers?, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 17 (2018) 2, 374-391 (zitiert: Nanteuil, Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Old Questions, New Answers?, 374). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  169. Newcombe, Andrew/Paradell, Lluis, Law and practice of investment treaties, Standards of treatment, Alphen aan den Rijn (2009) (zitiert: Newcombe/Paradell, Law and practice of investment treaties, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  170. Nitschke, Frauke/Ait-El-Hadj, Kamel, Determining the Place of Arbitration in ICSID Additional Facility Proceedings, ICSID Review, 30 (2015) 1, 243 259 (zitiert: Nitschke/Ait-El-Hadj, Determining the Place of Arbitration in ICSID Additional Facility Proceedings, 243). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  171. Nolan, Michael, Challenges To The Credibility Of The Investor-State Arbitration System, American University Business Law Review, 5 (2015) 3, 429-445 (zitiert: Nolan, Challenges To The Credibility Of The Investor-State Arbitration System, 429). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  172. Nolan, Michael/Caivano, Frédéric G., Limits of Consent - Arbitration without Privity and Beyond, in: Miguel Ángel Fernández-Ballesteros López, David Arias Lozano (Hrsg.), Liber amicorum Bernardo Cremades, New York/The Hague (2010), 873-911 (zitiert: Nolan/Caivano, Limits of Consent - Arbitration without Privity and Beyond, 873). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  173. Nouvel, Yves, La recevabilité des demandes reconventionnelles devant la Cour internationale de Justice à la lumière de deux ordonnances récentes, Annuaire français de droit international, 44 (1998) 1, 324-336 (zitiert: Nouvel, La recevabilité des demandes reconventionnelles devant la Cour internationale de Justice à la lumière de deux ordonnances récentes, 324). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  174. Nowrot, Karsten, Obligations of investors, in: Marc Bungenberg, Jörn Griebel, Stephan Hobe et al. (Hrsg.), International investment law, A handbook, Baden-Baden (2015), 1154-1185 (zitiert: Nowrot, Obligations of investors, 1154, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  175. Nyombi, Chrispas/Mortimer, Tom, Rights and obligations in the post-investment treaty denunciation period, International Arbitration Law Review, 21 (2018) 2, 46-54 (zi¬tiert: Nyombi/Mortimer, Rights and obligations in the post-investment treaty denunciation period, 46). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  176. Oppenheim, Lassa, International law, A treatise, London (2. Aufl. 1912) (zitiert: Oppenheim, International law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  177. Orakhelashvili, Alexander, The interpretation of acts and rules in public international law, Oxford monographs in international law, Oxford (2008) (zitiert: Orakhelashvili, The interpretation of acts and rules in public international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  178. Palevičienė, Solveiga, Consent to Arbitration and the Legacy of the SPP v. Egypt Case, Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 7 (2014) 1, 149-162 (zitiert: Palevičienė, Consent to Arbitration and the Legacy of the SPP v. Egypt Case, 149). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  179. Parra, Antonio R., Participation in the ICSID Convention, ICSID Review, 28 (2013) 1, 169-178 (zitiert: Parra, Participation in the ICSID Convention, 169). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  180. Parra, Antonio R., Provisions on the Settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment, ICSID Review, 12 (1997) 2, 287-364 (zitiert: Parra, Provisions on the Settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment, 287). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  181. Pathak, Harshad, Consenting to Counterclaims Under the ICSID Convention, Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, 19 (2019) 1, 101-125 (zitiert: Pathak, Consenting to Counterclaims Under the ICSID Convention, 101). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  182. Paulsson, Jan, Arbitration Without Privity, ICSID Review, 10 (1995) 2, 232 257 (zitiert: Paulsson, Arbitration Without Privity, 232). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  183. Paulsson, Jan, The ICSID Klöckner v. Cameroon Award: The Duties of Partners in North-South Economic Development Agreements, Schiedsspruch v. 21. Oktober 1983, ARB/81/2, Journal of International Arbitration, 1 (1984) 2, 145-168 (zitiert: Paulsson, The ICSID Klöckner v. Cameroon Award: The Duties of Partners in North-South Economic Development Agreements, 145). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  184. Paulsson, Jan/Petrochilos, Georgios, Revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, A Report (2006) (zitiert: Paulsson/Petrochilos, Revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  185. Pauwelyn, Joost, The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?, The American Journal of International Law, 95 (2001) 3, 535-578 (zitiert: Pauwelyn, The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?, 535). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  186. Pavic, Valdimir, Counterclaim and Set-off in International Commercial Arbitration, Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade International Edition, 54 (2006) 3, 101-116 (zitiert: Pavic, Counterclaim and Set-off in International Commercial Arbitration, 101). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  187. Pellet, Alain, The Case Law of the ICJ in Investment Arbitration, ICSID Review, 28 (2013) 2, 223-240 (zitiert: Pellet, The Case Law of the ICJ in Investment Arbitration, 223). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  188. Perkams, Markus, Piercing the Corporate Veil in International Investment Agreements, The Issue of Indirect Shareholder Claims Reloaded, in: Christina Knahr, August Reinisch (Hrsg.), Aktuelle Probleme und Entwicklungen im internationalen Investi¬tionsrecht, Tagungsband des 8. Graduiertentreffen im Internationalen Wirtschaftsrecht in Wien 2007, Internationale Wirtschaft und Recht Bd. 5, Stuttgart (2008), 93-114 (zitiert: Perkams, Piercing the Corporate Veil in International Investment Agreements, 93). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  189. Peters, Anne/Altwicker, Tilmann, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, mit rechtsvergleichenden Bezügen zum deutschen Grundgesetz, Schriftenreihe der Juris¬tischen Schulung Studium 161, München (2. Aufl. 2012) (zitiert: Peters/Altwicker, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, §). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  190. Petrochilos, Georgios, Extension of the Arbitration Clause to Non-Signatory States or State Entities: Does it Raise a Difference?, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd⁠.⁠ ⁠7, New York/Paris (2010), 119-130 (zitiert: Petrochilos, Extension of the Arbitration Clause to Non-Signatory States or State Entities: Does it Raise a Difference?, 119). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  191. Popova, Ina C./Poon, Fiona, From Perpetual Respondent to Aspiring Counterclaimant?, State Counterclaims in the New Wave of Investment Treaties, BDCR International Arbitration Review, 2 (2015) 2, 223-260 (zitiert: Popova/Poon, From Perpetual Respondent to Aspiring Counterclaimant?, 223). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  192. Potestà, Michele, State-to-State Dispute Settlement Pursuant to Bilateral Investment Treaties: Is There Potential?, in: Nerina Boschiero (Hrsg.), International courts and the development of international law, Essays in honour of Tullio Treves, Den Haag (2013), 753-768 (zitiert: Potestà, State-to-State Dispute Settlement Pursuant to Bilateral Investment Treaties: Is There Potential?, 753). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  193. Potestà, Michele, The Interpretation of Consent to ICSID Arbitration Contained in Domestic Investment Laws, Arbitration International, 27 (2011) 2, 149-169 (zitiert: Potestà, The Interpretation of Consent to ICSID Arbitration Contained in Domestic Investment Laws, 149). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  194. Potts, Jonathan, Stabilizing the Role of Umbrella Clauses in Bilateral Investment Trea¬ties: Intent, Reliance, and Internationalization, Virginia Journal of International Law, 51 (2010) 4, 1005-1045 (zitiert: Potts, Stabilizing the Role of Umbrella Clauses in Bilateral Investment Treaties: Intent, Reliance, and Internationalization, 1005). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  195. Presser, Stephen B., The Bogalusa Explosion, Single Business Enterprise, Alter Ego and Other Errors: Academics, Economics, Democracy, and Shareholder Limited Liability: Back towards a Unitary Abuse Theory of Piercing the Corporate Veil, Northwestern University Law Review, 100 (2006) 1, 405-436 (zitiert: Presser, The Bogalusa Explosion, Single Business Enterprise, Alter Ego and Other Errors: Academics, Economics, Democracy, and Shareholder Limited Liability: Back towards a Unitary Abuse Theory of Piercing the Corporate Veil, 405). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  196. Radi, Yannick, Regulatory Measures in International Investment Law: To Be Or Not To Be Compensated – A Commentary of Philip Morris v Uruguay, ICSID Review, 33 (2018) 1, 74-80 (zitiert: Radi, Regulatory Measures in International Investment Law: To Be Or Not To Be Compensated – A Commentary of Philip Morris v Uruguay, 74). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  197. Reisman, William M./Arsanjani, Mahnoush H., The Question of Unilateral Governmental Statements as Applicable Law in Investment Disputes, in: Pierre-Marie Dupuy (Hrsg.), Völkerrecht als Wertordnung, Common values in international law; Festschrift für Christian Tomuschat, Kehl (2006), 409-422 (zitiert: Reisman/Arsanjani, The Question of Unilateral Governmental Statements as Applicable Law in Investment Disputes, 409). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  198. Renteln, Alison Dundes, Encountering Counterclaims, Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, 15 (1987), 379-394 (zitiert: Renteln, Encountering Counterclaims, 379). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  199. Report of the Executive Directors on the ICSID Convention (10. September 1964) (zi¬tiert: Report of the Executive Directors on the ICSID Convention, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  200. Rivas, José Antonio, ICSID Treaty Counterclaims: Case Law and Treaty Evolution, Transnational Dispute Management, 11 (2014) 1, 1-45 (zitiert: Rivas, ICSID Treaty Counterclaims: Case Law and Treaty Evolution, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  201. Rodner, James O./Estévez, Jaime M., BITs in Pieces: The Effectiveness of ICSID Jurisdiction after the ICSID Convention Has Been Denounced, Journal of International Arbitration, 29 (2012) 4, 437-451 (zitiert: Rodner/Estévez, BITs in Pieces: The Effec¬tiveness of ICSID Jurisdiction after the ICSID Convention Has Been Denounced, 437). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  202. Rosenne, Shabtai/Shaw, Malcolm N., Rosenne's Law and practice of the International Court: 1920-2015, Leiden/Boston (5. Aufl. 2016) (zitiert: Rosenne/Shaw, Rosenne's Law and practice of the International Court: 1920-2015, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  203. Ryngaert, Cedric, The concept of jurisdiction in international law, Chapter 2, in: Alexander Orakhelashvili (Hrsg.), Research handbook on jurisdiction and immunities in international law, Research handbooks in international law, Cheltenham/Northampton (2015), 50-76 (zitiert: Ryngaert, The concept of jurisdiction in international law, 50). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  204. Sachs, Michael, Grundgesetz, Kommentar, München (8. Aufl. 2018) (zitiert: Sachs/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  205. Salacuse, Jeswald W., BIT by BIT: The Growth of Bilateral Investment Treaties and Their Impact on Foreign Investment in Developing Countries, The International Lawyer, 24 (1990) 3, 655-675 (zitiert: Salacuse, BIT by BIT: The Growth of Bilateral Investment Treaties and Their Impact on Foreign Investment in Developing Countries, 655). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  206. Salmon, Jean, Dictionnaire de droit international public, Bruxelles (2001) (zitiert: Salmon, Dictionnaire de droit international public, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  207. Scerni, Mario, La procédure de la Cour permanente de justice internationale, Recueil des cours / Académie de Droit International de La Haye, 3 (1938), 565-681 (zitiert: Scerni, La procédure de la Cour permanente de justice internationale, 361). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  208. Schill, Stephan W., Enabling Private Ordering: Function, Scope and Effect of Umbrella Clauses in International Investment Treaties, Minnesota Journal of International Law, 18 (2009) 1, 1-98 (zitiert: Schill, Enabling Private Ordering: Function, Scope and Effect of Umbrella Clauses in International Investment Treaties, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  209. Schöbener, Burkhard/Markert, Lars, Das International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, 105 (2006), 65-116 (zitiert: Schöbener/Markert, Das International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), 65). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  210. Schoch, Friedrich/Schneider, Jens-Peter/Bier, Wolfgang, Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung, Kommentar, München (37. EL 2019) (zitiert: Schoch/Schneider/Bier/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  211. Schönfeld, Ulrich von, Die Immunität ausländischer Staaten vor deutschen Gerichten, NJW, (1986), 2980-2987 (zitiert: Schönfeld, Die Immunität ausländischer Staaten vor deutschen Gerichten, 2980). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  212. Schreuer, Christoph, Calvo's Grandchildren: The Return of Local Remedies in Investment Arbitration, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 4 (2005) 1, 1-17 (zitiert: Schreuer, Calvo's Grandchildren: The Return of Local Reme¬dies in Investment Arbitration, 1). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  213. Schreuer, Christoph, Consent to Arbitration, in: Peter T. Muchlinski (Hrsg.), The Oxford handbook of international investment law, Oxford (2008), 830-866 (zitiert: Schreuer, Consent to Arbitration, 830). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  214. Schreuer, Christoph, Course on Dispute Settlement in International Trade, Investment and Intellectual Property, 2.3 Consent to Arbitration, (2003) (zitiert: Schreuer, Course on Dispute Settlement in International Trade, Investment and Intellectual Property, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  215. Schreuer, Christoph, The ICSID convention: a commentary, A commentary on the convention on the settlement of investment disputes between states and nationals of other states, Cambridge (2. Aufl. 2009) (zitiert: Schreuer, The ICSID convention: a commentary). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  216. Schreuer, Christoph, Travelling the BIT Route: Of Waiting Periods, Umbrella Clauses and Forks in the Road, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 5 (2004), 231-256 (zitiert: Schreuer, Travelling the BIT Route, 231). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  217. Schwartmann, Rolf, Private im Wirtschaftsvölkerrecht, zugl. Habil., Mainz (2004), Jus publicum 122, Tübingen (2005) (zitiert: Schwartmann, Private im Wirtschaftsvölkerrecht, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  218. Schwarzenberger, Georg, International law as applied by international courts and tribunals, International law Volume 1, London (1945) (zitiert: Schwarzenberger, International law as applied by international courts and tribunals, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  219. Schwebel, Stephen M., International Protection of Contractual Arrangements, American Society of International Law Proceedings, 53 (1959) 5, 266 273 (zitiert: Schwebel, International Protection of Contractual Arrangements, 266). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  220. Schwebel, Stephen M., Justice in international law, Selected writings of Stephen M. Schwebel, Cambridge (1994) (zitiert: Schwebel, Justice in international law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  221. Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz, The Abs-Shawcross Draft Convention to Protect Private Foreign Investment: Comments on the Round Table, Journal of Public Law, 10 (1961) 1, 100-112 (zitiert: Seidl-Hohenveldern, The Abs-Shawcross Draft Convention to Protect Private Foreign Investment: Comments on the Round Table, 100). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  222. Shao, Xuan, Environmental and Human Rights Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration: at the Crossroads of Domestic and International Law, Journal of International Economic Law, 24 (2021) 1, 157-179 (zitiert: Shao, Environmental and Human Rights Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration: at the Crossroads of Domestic and International Law, 157). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  223. Shihata, Ibrahim F. I./Parra, Antonio R., The Experience of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, ICSID Review, 14 (1999) 2, 299-361 (zitiert: Shihata/Parra, The Experience of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, 299). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  224. Siles-Brügge, Gabriel, Transatlantic investor protection as a threat to democracy: the potency and limits of an emotive frame, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 30 (2017) 5-6, 464-488 (zitiert: Siles-Brügge, Transatlantic investor protection as a threat to democracy: the potency and limits of an emotive frame, 464). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  225. Sinclair, Anthony C., The Origins of the Umbrella Clause in the International Law of Investment Protection, Arbitration International, 20 (2004) 4, 411-434 (zitiert: A.C. Sinclair, The Origins of the Umbrella Clause in the International Law of Investment Protection, 411). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  226. Sinclair, Ian, The Law of Sovereign Immunity, Recent Developments, Recueil des cours / Académie de Droit International de La Haye, 167 (1980), 113-284 (zitiert: I⁠.⁠ ⁠Sinclair, The Law of Sovereign Immunity, 113). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  227. Steingruber, Andrea M., Antoine Goetz and others v Republic of Burundi, Consent and Arbitral Tribunal Competence to Hear Counterclaims in Treaty-based ICSID Arbitrations, ICSID Review, 28 (2013) 2, 291-300 (zitiert: Steingruber, Antoine Goetz and others v Republic of Burundi, Consent and Arbitral Tribunal Competence to Hear Counterclaims in Treaty-based ICSID Arbitrations, 291). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  228. Steingruber, Andrea M., Consent in international arbitration, Oxford international arbitration series, Oxford (2012) (zitiert: Steingruber, Consent in international arbitra¬tion, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  229. Thirlway, Hugh, Case Analysis: Counterclaims Before the International Court of Justice: The Genocide Convention and Oil Platforms Decisions, Leiden Journal of International Law, 12 (1999) 1, 197-229 (zitiert: Thirlway, Case Analysis: Counterclaims Before the International Court of Justice: The Genocide Convention and Oil Platforms Decisions, 197). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  230. Thomas, J. Christopher/Dhillon, Harpreet K., Applicable law under international investment treaties, Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 26 (2014), 975-998 (zitiert: Thomas/Dhillon, Applicable law under international investment treaties, 975). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  231. Tienhaara, Kyla, Regulatory Chill in a Warming World: The Threat to Climate Policy Posed by Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Transnational Environmental Law, 7 (2018) 2, 229-250 (zitiert: Tienhaara, Regulatory Chill in a Warming World: The Threat to Climate Policy Posed by Investor-State Dispute Settlement, 229). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  232. Topcan, Utku, Abuse of the Right to Access ICSID Arbitration, ICSID Review, 29 (2014) 3, 627-647 (zitiert: Topcan, Abuse of the Right to Access ICSID Arbitration, 627). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  233. Toral, Mehmet/Schultz, Thomas, The State, a Perpetual Respondent in Investment Arbitration? Some Unorthodox Considerations, in: Michael Waibel (Hrsg.), The backlash against investment arbitration, Perceptions and reality, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010), 577-602 (zitiert: Toral/Schultz, The State, a Perpetual Respondent in Investment Arbitration? Some Unorthodox Considerations, 577). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  234. Torres Bernárdez, Santiago, La modification des articles du règlement de la Cour internationale de Justice relatifs aux exceptions préliminaires et aux demandes reconventionnelles, Annuaire français de droit international, 49 (2003) 1, 207-247 (zitiert: Torres Bernárdez, La modification des articles du règlement de la Cour internationale de Justice relatifs aux exceptions préliminaires et aux demandes reconventionnelles, 207). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  235. Townsend, John M., Extending an Arbitration Clause to a Non-Signatory Claimant or Non-Signatory Defendant: Does it Make a Difference?, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd. 7, New York/Paris (2010), 111-118 (zitiert: Townsend, Extending an Arbitration Clause to a Non-Signatory Claimant or Non-Signatory Defendant: Does it Make a Difference?, 111). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  236. UNCITRAL Secretariat, Possible reform of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), Note by the Secretariat (5. September 2018) (zitiert: UNCITRAL Secretariat, Possible reform of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  237. United Nations, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Documents of the second part of the seventeenth session and of the eighteenth session including the reports of the Commission to the General Assembly, 2 (1966) (zitiert: United Nations, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  238. van Harten, Gus, Investment treaty arbitration and public law, Oxford monographs in international law, New York (2007) (zitiert: van Harten, Investment treaty arbitration and public law, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  239. van Harten, Gus, Perceived Bias in Investment Treaty Arbitration, in: Michael Waibel (Hrsg.), The backlash against investment arbitration, Perceptions and reality, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010), 433-453 (zitiert: van Harten, Perceived Bias in Investment Treaty Arbitration, 433). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  240. van Harten, Gus/Loughlin, Martin, Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law, European Journal of International Law, 17 (2006) 1, 121-150 (zitiert: van Harten/Loughlin, Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law, 121). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  241. Vandekerckhove, Karen, Piercing the Corporate Veil: a Transnational Approach, European company law series 2, Alphen aan den Rijn (2007) (zitiert: Vandekerckhove, Piercing the Corporate Veil: a Transnational Approach, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  242. Vandevelde, Kenneth J., A Brief History of International Investment Agreements, U.C. Davis Journal of International Law & Policy, 12 (2005) 1, 157-194 (zitiert: Vandevelde, A Brief History of International Investment Agreements, 157). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  243. Vandevelde, Kenneth J., Bilateral investment treaties, History, Policy, and Interpretation, Oxford (2010) (zitiert: Vandevelde, Bilateral investment treaties, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  244. Vargiu, Paolo, From Advisory Opinions to Binding Decisions: The new Appeal Mechanism of the UN System of Administration of Justice, International Organizations Law Review, 8 (2010) 2, 261-276 (zitiert: Vargiu, From Advisory Opinions to Binding Decisions: The new Appeal Mechanism of the UN System of Administration of Justice, 261). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  245. Verbist, Herman/Schäfer, Erik/Imhoos, Christophe, ICC Arbitration in Practice, The Hague, Bern, New York (2, Aufl. 2015) (zitiert: Verbist/Schäfer/Imhoos, ICC Arbitration in Practice, Chapter 3: Arbitral Proceedings Under The ICC Rules of Arbitration of 2012, 23). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  246. Verdross, Alfred/Simma, Bruno, Universelles Völkerrecht, Theorie und Praxis, Berlin (3. Aufl. 2010) (zitiert: Verdross/Simma, Universelles Völkerrecht, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  247. Villiger, Mark E., Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Leiden/Boston (2008) (zitiert: Villiger, Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art., Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  248. Vitzthum, Wolfgang/Proelß, Alexander, Völkerrecht, De Gruyter Studium, Berlin/Boston (8. Aufl. 2019) (zitiert: Vitzthum/Proelß, Völkerrecht, Dritter Abschnitt: Der Staat und der Einzelne als Völkerrechtssubjekte, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  249. Vizcaíno, Gabriela P./Alvarez, José E./Sauvant, Karl P./Ahmed, Kamil Gerard, The evolving international investment regime, Expectations, realities, options, Oxford/New York (2011) (zitiert: Vizcaíno et al., The evolving international investment regime, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  250. Vohryzek-Griest, Ana, State Counterclaims in Investor-State Disputes: a History of 30 Years of Failure, International Law, Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional, 7 (2009) 15, 83-124 (zitiert: Vohryzek-Griest, State Counterclaims in Investor-State Disputes: a History of 30 Years of Failure, 83). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  251. Waibel, Michael/Kaushal, Asha/Chung, Kyo-Hwa/Balchin, Claire, The Backlash against Investment Arbitration: Perceptions and Reality, in: Michael Waibel (Hrsg.), The backlash against investment arbitration, Perceptions and reality, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010), xxxvii-li (zitiert: Waibel et al., The Backlash against Investment Arbitration: Perceptions and Reality, xxxvii). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  252. Waibel, Michael/Rylatt, Jake W., Counterclaims in International Law, SSRN Journal 2014, 283-304 (zitiert: Waibel/Rylatt, Counterclaims in International Law, 283). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  253. Waincymer, Jeffrey M., Procedure and evidence in international arbitration, Alphen aan den Rijn (2012) (zitiert: Waincymer, Procedure and evidence in international arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  254. Wälde, Thomas W., "Equality of Arms" in Investment Arbitration: Procedural Challenges, in: Katia Yannaca-Small (Hrsg.), Arbitration under international investment agreements, A guide to the key issues, Oxford/New York (2. Aufl. 2018), 161-188 (zitiert: Wälde, "Equality of Arms" in Investment Arbitration: Procedural Challenges, 161). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  255. Wälde, Thomas W., Investment Arbitration Under the Energy Charter Treaty - From Dispute Settlement to Treaty Implementation, Arbitration International, 12 (1996) 4, 429-466 (zitiert: Wälde, Investment Arbitration Under the Energy Charter Treaty - From Dispute Settlement to Treaty Implementation, 429). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  256. Wälde, Thomas W., Procedural Challenges in Investment Arbitration under the Shadow of the Dual Role of the State, Asymmetries and Tribunals' Duty to Ensure, Pro-ac¬tively, the Equality of Arms, Arbitration International, 26 (2010) 1, 3-42 (zitiert: Wälde, Procedural Challenges in Investment Arbitration under the Shadow of the Dual Role of the State, 3). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  257. Wälde, Thomas W., The Umbrella Clause in Investment Arbitration, A Comment on Original Intentions and Recent Cases, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 6 (2005), 183-236 (zitiert: Wälde, The Umbrella Clause in Investment Arbitration, 183). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  258. Walter, André von, Investor-State Contracts in the Context of International Investment Law, Chapter 3: State Contracts and the Relevance of Investment Contract Arbitration, in: Marc Bungenberg, Jörn Griebel, Stephan Hobe et al. (Hrsg.), International investment law, A handbook, Baden-Baden (2015), 80-92 (zitiert: Walter, Investor-State Contracts in the Context of International Investment Law, 80). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  259. Weeramantry, J. Romesh, Treaty interpretation in investment arbitration, Oxford international arbitration series, Oxford (2012) (zitiert: Weeramantry, Treaty interpretation in investment arbitration, Rn.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  260. Weil, Prosper, Problèmes relatifs aux contrats passés entre un Etat et un particulier, Recueil des cours / Académie de Droit International de La Haye, 128 (2007), 97-240 (zitiert: Weil, Problèmes relatifs aux contrats passés entre un Etat et un particulier, 97). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  261. Weiler, Todd, Balancing Human Rights and Investor Protection: A New Approach for a Different Legal Order, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 27 (2004) 2, 429-452 (zitiert: Weiler, Balancing Human Rights and Investor Protection: A New Approach for a Different Legal Order, 429). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  262. Weissenfels, Axel, Independent BIT Standard or Mere Affirmative Commitment - The Umbrella Clause, Austrian Review of international and European Law, 10 (2005) 1, 95-124 (zitiert: Weissenfels, Independent BIT Standard or Mere Affirmative Commitment - The Umbrella Clause, 95). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  263. Wells, Louis T., Backlash to Investment Arbitration: Three Causes, in: Michael Waibel (Hrsg.), The backlash against investment arbitration, Perceptions and reality, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010), 341-352 (zitiert: Wells, Backlash to Investment Arbitration: Three Causes, 341). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  264. Wiesner-Lameth, Michelle, Overcoming the Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration, Merit of the EU Proposal vis-à-vis the Standard of Judicial Independence and Impartiality, zugl. Diss., Düsseldorf (2018) (zitiert: Wiesner-Lameth, Overcoming the Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  265. Yen, Trinh Hai, The Interpretation of Investment Treaties, International Litigation in Practice, Leiden (2014) (zitiert: Yen, The Interpretation of Investment Treaties, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  266. Youssef, Karim A., The Limits of Consent: The Right or Obligation to Arbitrate of Non-Signatories in Groups of Companies, in: Eric A. Schwartz, Bernard Hanotiau (Hrsg.), Multiparty arbitration, Dossiers / ICC Institute of World Business Law Bd. 7, New York/Paris (2010), 71-109 (zitiert: Youssef, The Limits of Consent: The Right or Obligation to Arbitrate of Non-Signatories in Groups of Companies, 71). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  267. Yu, Vicente/Marshal, Fiona, Investor's Obligations and Host State Policy Space, International Institute for Sustainable Development/South Centre/Moroccan Department of Investment, 2nd Annual Forum of Developing Country Investment Negotiators (2008) (zitiert: Yu/Marshal, Investor's Obligations and Host State Policy Space, S.). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  268. Zarra, Giovanni, Right to regulate, Margin of Appreciation and Proportionality: Current Status in Investment Arbitration in Light of Philip Morris v. Uruguay, Brazilian Journal of International Law, 14 (2017) 2, 95-121 (zitiert: Zarra, Right to regulate, Margin of Appreciation and Proportionality: Current Status in Investment Arbitration in Light of Philip Morris v. Uruguay, 95). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898
  269. Zimmermann, Andreas/Tomuschat, Christian/Oellers-Frahm, Karin/Tams, Christian (Hrsg.), The Statute of the International Court of Justice, A commentary, Oxford (6. Aufl. 2020) (zitiert: Zimmermann/Tomuschat/Oellers-Frahm/Tams/Bearbeiter). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/9783748944898

Similar publications

from the series "Studien zum Internationalen Investitionsrecht"
Cover of book: Das internationale Investitionsrecht aus rechtspluralistischer Perspektive
Monograph No access
Petyo Nikolov
Das internationale Investitionsrecht aus rechtspluralistischer Perspektive
Cover of book: Die Auswirkungen fragiler Staatlichkeit auf internationale Investitionsschutzabkommen
Monograph No access
Johanna Baumann-Landschein
Die Auswirkungen fragiler Staatlichkeit auf internationale Investitionsschutzabkommen
Cover of book: Die investitionsschutzrechtlichen Standards des Energy Charter Treaty
Monograph No access
Christian Schlemann
Die investitionsschutzrechtlichen Standards des Energy Charter Treaty
Cover of book: Host State Circumstances and Absolute Standards of Protection in International Investment Law
Monograph No access
Johanna Braun
Host State Circumstances and Absolute Standards of Protection in International Investment Law
Cover of book: Investitionskontrolle in Deutschland
Monograph No access
Bodo Dehne
Investitionskontrolle in Deutschland

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Give feedback

We welcome your feedback on content and features. Your message helps us to continuously improve our service.

Rating
Attach images
or drag and drop
PNG or JPG (max. 3 MB)

Login

Forgotten your password?
Login via your Institution (SSO, Shibboleth, OpenAthens)
Don't have an account yet?
Register now

Cite publication

Download: RIS BibTex