Cover of book: The Influence of the 2014 UNCITRAL Transparency Rules on Treaty-based Investor-State-Arbitration
Buy in shop
, to see if you have full access to this publication.
Book Titles No access

The Influence of the 2014 UNCITRAL Transparency Rules on Treaty-based Investor-State-Arbitration

Authors:
Publisher:
 15.07.2022

Summary

Investor-state dispute settlement proceedings have taken place behind closed doors for a long time. Due to the involvement of nation states and the fact that such proceedings may affect highly political contro-versies, a minimum of transparency is required for legitimacy reasons. The UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration are an attempt towards more transparency in such proceedings. The present dissertation examines whether and to what extent arbitration practise and nation states, when negotiating international investment agreements, have committed towards more transparency since the introduction of the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules.

Keywords

Bibliographic data

Copyright year
2022
Publication date
15.07.2022
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-8838-5
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-3398-4
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series
Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung
Volume
60
Language
English
Pages
194
Product type
Book Titles

Table of contents

ChapterPages
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access 1 - 17
    1. I. What is transparency? – Terminology and definition No access
      1. 1. ISDS and public policy issues No access
      2. 2. From strict confidentiality towards more transparency No access
      1. 1. The ICSID System No access
      2. 2. The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules No access
      3. 3. Institutionally supported arbitration No access
      4. 4. Ad hoc arbitration No access
        1. a) The commencement of arbitral proceedings No access
        2. b) The appointment of the tribunal No access
        3. c) The seat of the arbitration No access
        4. d) The language of the arbitration No access
        5. e) The final award No access
      1. 1. Advantages of transparent proceedings No access
      2. 2. Disadvantages of transparent proceedings No access
      3. 3. Third-party participation and amicus curiae submissions No access
      4. 4. Publication of documents and awards No access
      5. 5. Public hearings No access
        1. a) Treaty interpretation by state parties No access
        2. b) The use of precedent No access
        3. c) The establishment of a permanent international investment court and an appellate mechanism No access
      7. 7. ICSIDs approach to transparency in ISDS No access
      8. 8. Other institutions and their approach on transparency No access
        1. a) Third party participation No access
        2. b) Public hearings No access
        3. c) Publication of documents No access
        4. d) NAFTAs influence on North American treaty practise No access
        5. e) From NAFTA to USMCA No access
    3. III. Background on the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules No access
      1. 1. Scope of application No access
      2. 2. Ratione temporis No access
      3. 3. Publication of information at the commencement of arbitral proceedings No access
      4. 4. Publication of documents No access
      5. 5. Submission by a third person No access
      6. 6. Submission by a non-disputing Party to the treaty No access
      7. 7. Oral hearings No access
      8. 8. Exceptions to transparency No access
      9. 9. Repository of published information No access
      10. 10. Consequences of a violation of the UNCITRAL TR No access
    5. V. The UNCITRAL TR and third-party funding No access
    6. VI. The UNCITRAL TR and their influence on commercial arbitration and on other international arbitration institutions No access
      1. 1. International Court of Justice No access
      2. 2. WTO Dispute Settlement Body No access
      3. 3. Court of Justice of the European Union No access
      4. 4. Conclusion No access
      1. 1. Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement No access
      2. 2. EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement No access
      3. 3. EU-Singapore Investment Protection Agreement No access
      4. 4. EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EUVIPA) No access
      5. 5. EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment No access
      6. 6. EU-United Kingdom Trade and Cooperation Agreement No access
      1. 1. BITs with India No access
      2. 2. Australian investment agreements No access
      3. 3. IIAs with Japan No access
      4. 4. Central America-Republic of Korea FTA No access
      5. 5. Hong Kong-Mexico BIT No access
      6. 6. China-Mauritius FTA No access
    3. III. Conclusion No access
    1. I. The UNCITRAL TR and the publication of settlement agreements No access
      1. 1. OOO Manolium Processing v. Belarus No access
        1. a) Iberdrola, S.A. (España), Iberdrola Energía, S.A.U. v. Bolivia No access
        2. b) The Estate of Julio Miguel Orlandini-Agreda; Compañía Minera Orlandini Ltda. v. Bolivia No access
        1. a) Transparency provisions No access
        2. b) The redaction of footnote 11 of the non-disputing party submission No access
      4. 4. Michael Ballantine and Lisa Ballantine v. Dominican Republic No access
      5. 5. Nord Stream 2 AG v. European Union No access
      6. 6. BSG Resources Limited, BSG Resources Limited and BSG Resources SÀRL v. Republic of Guinea No access
      7. 7. Christian Doutremepuich and Antoine Doutremepuich v. Mauritius No access
      8. 8. Patel Engineering Limited v. Republic of Mozambique No access
        1. a) Gramercy Funds Management LLC and Gramercy Peru Holdings LLC v. Peru No access
          1. aa) Renco Group Inc. v. Republic of Peru, UNCT/13/1 No access
          2. bb) Renco Group, Inc. v. The Republic of Peru, PCA Case No. 2019-46 No access
        3. c) Bacilio Amorrortu (USA) v. Peru No access
      10. 10. Rand Investments Ltd. and others v. Serbia No access
    3. III. Conclusion No access
  6. G. Chapter 5: Conclusion and prospects No access 165 - 170
  7. References No access 171 - 180
  8. Online Resources (accessed 7 June 2021) No access 181 - 188
  9. Table of Cases No access 189 - 194

Bibliography (121)

  1. Alexander, Klint, ‘Article 6. Hearings’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 227–248. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  2. Alvarez, José E, ‘Implications for the Future of International Investment Law’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 29–35. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  3. Augsburger, Thierry P, ‘Article 7. Exceptions to transparency’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 249–306. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  4. Baetens, Freya, ‘Preferential Trade and Investment Agreements and the Trade/Investment Divide, Is the Whole More than the Sum of Its Parts?’ in: Rainer Hofmann (ed), Preferential trade and investment agreements: from recalibration to reintegration (Baden-Baden 2013), pp. 91–128. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  5. Baker, John S/Keiser, Lindsey, ‘NAFTA/USMCA Dispute Settlement Mechanisms and the Constitution’ 50 University of Miami Inter-American Law Review (U Miami Inter-Am L Rev) 2019, pp. 1–57. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  6. Banerjee, Arpan/Murthy, Ashwin, ‘Rand Investments v. Republic of Serbia: Transparency and the Limits of Consent’ 38 Journal of International Arbitration 2021, pp. 105–122. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  7. Benvenisti, Eyal/Downs, George W, ‘The Empire's New Clothes, Political Economy and the Fragmentation of International Law’ 60 Stanford Law Review 2007, pp. 595–632. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  8. Besch, Morris, ‘Typical Questions Arising within Negotiations’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 93–152. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  9. Bianco, Giuseppe, ‘Article 2. Publication of information at the commencement of arbitral proceedings’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 64–90. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  10. Blackaby, Nigel and others, Redfern and Hunter on international arbitration, (5th edn. Oxford 2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  11. Blavi, Francisco, ‘A Case in Favour of Publicly Available Awards in International Commercial Arbitration, Transparency v. Confidentiality’ International Business Law Journal (IBLJ) 2016, pp. 83–92. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  12. Bogdandy, Armin v/Venzke, Ingo, ‘On the Democratic Legitimation of International Judicial Lawmaking’ in: Armin v Bogdandy and Ingo Venzke (eds), International judicial lawmaking: On public authority and democratic legitimation in global governance (Heidelberg 2012), pp. 473–509. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  13. Bogdandy, Armin v/Venzke, Ingo, In wessen Namen?: Internationale Gerichte in Zeiten globalen Regierens (Berlin 2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  14. Bronckers, Marco, ‘Is Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Superior to Litigation Before Domestic Courts?, An EU View on Bilateral Trade Agreements’ 18 Journal of International Economic Law 2015, pp. 655–677. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  15. Brower, Charles H, ‘Structure, Legitimacy, and NAFTA's Investment Chapter’ 36 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (Vand J Transnat'l L) 2003, pp. 37–94. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  16. Brown, Chester, ‘The evolution of the Regime of International Investment Agreements, History, Economics and Politics’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 153–185. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  17. Bungenberg, Marc and others, ‘General Introduction to International Investment Law’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 1–5. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  18. Bungenberg, Marc/Reinisch, August, ‘Special Issue: The Anatomy of the (Invisible) EU Model BIT’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 375–378. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  19. Bungenberg, Marc/Titi, Catherine, ‘Precedents in International Investment Law’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 1505–1516. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  20. Burgstaller, Markus, ‘Dispute Settlement in EU International Investment Agreements with Third States: Three Salient Problems’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 551–569. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  21. Büstgens, Johanna, Transparenz und Öffentlichkeit gemischter Schiedsverfahren. Dissertation (Berlin 2016). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  22. Calamita, N J, ‘Dispute Settlement Transparency in Europe's Evolving Investment Treaty Policy’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 645–678. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  23. Claussen, Kathleen, ‘Article 8. Repository of published information’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 307–320. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  24. Coe, Jack J, ‘Transparency in the Resolution of Investor-State Disputes - Adoption, Adaption, and NAFTA Leadership’ Kansas Law Review (Kan L Rev) 2006, pp. 1339–1385. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  25. Condon, Bradley J, ‘From NAFTA to USMCA, Two's Company, Three's a Crowd’ Latin American Journal of Trade Policy 2018, pp. 30–48. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  26. De Brabandere, Eric, ‘Co-existence, complementarity or Conflict?, Interaction between Preferential Trade and Investment Agreements and Bilateral Investment Treaties’ in: Rainer Hofmann (ed), Preferential trade and investment agreements: from recalibration to reintegration (Baden-Baden 2013), pp. 37–70. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  27. Delaney, Joachim/Magraw, Daniel B, ‘Procedural Transparency’ in: Peter T Muchlinski (ed), The Oxford handbook of international investment law (Oxford 2008), pp. 723–787. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  28. Delimatsis, Panagiotis, ‘Institutional Transparency in the WTO’ in: Andrea Bianchi and Anne Peters (eds), Transparency in international law (Cambridge 2013), pp. 112–141. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  29. Díaz, Hugo P, ‘Transparency in International Dispute Settlement Proceedings on Trade and Investment’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 193–200. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  30. Dimsey, Mariel, ‘Article 4. Submission by a third person’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 128–195. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  31. Dolzer, Rudolf/Schreuer, Christoph, Principles of International Investment Law, (Oxford 2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  32. Dugan, Christopher and others, Investor-state arbitration, (New York 2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  33. Euler, Dimitrij/Scherer, Maxi, ‘Conclusion: The Rules as a swing of the pendulum? ’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 351–356. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  34. Franck, Susan D, ‘The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions’ 73 Fordham Law Review 2005, pp. 1521–1625. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  35. Franck, Susan D, ‘Challenges Facing Investment Disputes, Reconsidering Dispute Resolution in International Investment Agreements’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 143–192. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  36. Gaffney, John P/Akçay, Zeynep, ‘European Bilateral Approaches’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 186–201. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  37. Garcia, Frank J and others, ‘Reforming the International Investment Regime, Lessons from International Trade Law’ 18 Journal of International Economic Law 2015, pp. 861–892. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  38. Garner, Bryan A, Black's law dictionary, (10th edn. St. Paul, Minn. 2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  39. Gehring, Markus/Euler, Dimitrij, ‘Public interest in investment arbitration’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 7–27. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  40. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M/Victor, David G, ‘Secrecy in International Investment Arbitration: An Empirical Analysis’ Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS) 2016, 161-182. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  41. Herdegen, Matthias, Principles of International Economic Law, (1st edn. Oxford 2013). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  42. Hindelang, Steffen, ‘Part II: Study on Investor-State Dispute Settlement ('ISDS') and Alternatives of Dispute Resolution in International Investment Law’ in: Pieter J Kuijper and others (eds), Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in the EU's international investment agreements: Study (Luxembourg 2014), pp. 39–119. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  43. Hindelang, Steffen/Hagemeyer, Teoman M, In pursuit of an international investment court: Recently negotiated investment chapters in EU comprehensive free trade agreements in comparative perspective (Brussels 2017). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  44. Hobe, Stephan, ‘The Development of the Law of Aliens and the Emergence of General Principles of Protection under Public International Law’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 6–22. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  45. Hoffmeister, Frank/Alexandru, Gabriela, ‘A First Glimpse of Light on the Emerging Invisible EU Model BIT’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 379–401. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  46. Hughes, Valerie, ‘The institutional dimension’ in: Daniel L Bethlehem (ed), The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law (Oxford 2009), pp. 270–297. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  47. Jackson, John H, Sovereignty, the WTO and Changing Fundamentals of International Law, (Cambridge 2006). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  48. Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle, ‘Chapter Fifteen, Non-Disputing State Submissions in Investment Arbitration: Resurgence of Diplomatic Protection?’ in: Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Marcelo G Kohen and Jorge E Viñuales (eds), Diplomatic and judicial means of dispute settlement (Leiden 2013), pp. 307–326. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  49. Kee, Christopher, ‘Article 3. Publication of documents’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 91–127. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  50. Koepp, Johannes/Sim, Cameron, ‘The application of transparency’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 321–350. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  51. Korzun, Vera, ‘The Right to Regulate in Investor-State Arbitration, Slicing and Dicing Regulatory Carve-Outs’ 50 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (Vand J Transnat'l L) 2017, pp. 355–413. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  52. Kuijper, Pieter J, ‘Part I: Study on Investment Protection Agreements as Instruments of International Economic Law’ in: Pieter J Kuijper and others (eds), Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in the EU's international investment agreements: Study (Luxembourg 2014), pp. 8–35. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  53. Lamb, Sophie/Harrison, Daniel/Hen, Jonathan, ‘Recent Developments in the Law and Practice of Amicus Briefs in Investor-State Arbitration’ 5 Indian Journal of Arbitration Law (Indian J Arb L) 2016, pp. 72–92. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  54. Lamm, Carolyn B/Nagarajan, Karthik, ‘The Continuing Evolution of Investor-State Arbitration as a Dynamic and Resilient form of Dispute Settlement’ 5 Indian Journal of Arbitration Law (Indian J Arb L) 2017, pp. 93–112. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  55. Legum, Barton, ‘Options to Establish an Appellate Mechanism for Investment Disputes’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 231–239. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  56. Lester, Simon/Mercurio, Bryan/Davies, Arwel, World Trade Law: Text, Materials and Commentary (2nd edn. Oxford, Portland, Oregon 2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  57. Lin, Wei-Chung, ‘Safeguarding the Environment, The Effectiveness of Amicus Curiae Submissions in Investor-State Arbitration’ 19 International Community Law Review 2017, pp. 207–301. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  58. Loken, Keith, ‘Introductory note to UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration’ 52 International Legal Materials (ILM) 2013, pp. 1300–1308. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  59. Lowenfeld, Andreas F, International Economic Law, (2nd edn. Oxford 2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  60. Mann, Howard, ‘Transparency and Consistency in International Investment Law, Can the Problems be Fixed by Tinkering?’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 213–221. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  61. Markert, Lars, ‘International Investment Law and Treaty Interpretation, Problems, Particularities and Possible Trends’ in: Rainer Hofmann and Christian J Tams (eds), International Investment Law and General International Law: From Clinical Isolation to Systemic Integration? (Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung, Baden-Baden 2011), pp. 53–69. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  62. McRae, D, ‘The WTO Appellate Body: A Model for an ICSID Appeals Facility?’ 1 Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS) 2010, pp. 371–387. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  63. Menaker, Andrea J, ‘Piercing the Veil of Confidentiality, The Recent Trend Towards Greater Public Participation and Transparency in Investor-State Arbitration’ in: Katia Yannaca-Small (ed), Arbitration under international investment agreements: A guide to the key issues (Oxford, New York 2010), pp. 129–160. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  64. Miller, Kristin, ‘The Future of Investor-State Arbitration, Greater Transparency on the Horizon for UNCITRAL Rules’ Arbitration Law Review (ALR) 2011, pp. 602–619. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  65. Mitchell, Andrew D, Legal Principles in WTO Disputes, (Cambridge 2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  66. Moses, Margaret L, The principles and practice of international commercial arbitration, (New York 2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  67. Muchlinski, Peter T, ‘The Role of Preferential Trade and Investment Agreements in International Investment Law, From Unforeseen Historical Developments to an Uncertain Future’ in: Rainer Hofmann (ed), Preferential trade and investment agreements: from recalibration to reintegration (Baden-Baden 2013), pp. 211–228. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  68. Nakagawa, Junji/Magraw, Daniel B, ‘Introduction’ in: Junji Nakagawa (ed), Transparency in International Trade and Investment Dispute Settlement (London 2012), pp. 1–14. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  69. Neumann, Thore/Simma, Bruno, ‘Transparency in International Adjudication’ in: Andrea Bianchi and Anne Peters (eds), Transparency in international law (Cambridge 2013), pp. 436–476. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  70. Newcombe, Andrew/Paradell, Lluis, Law and practice of investment treaties: Standards of treatment (Alphen aan den Rijn 2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  71. Ngangjoh-Hodu, Yenkong/Ajibo, Collins C, ‘ICSID Annulment Procedure and the WTO Appellate System: The Case for an Appellate System for Investment Arbitration’ 6 Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS) 2015, pp. 308–331. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  72. Onwuamaegbu, Ucheora, ‘International Dispute Settlement Mechanisms, Choosing Between Institutionally Supported and Ad Hoc; and Between Institutions’ in: Katia Yannaca-Small (ed), Arbitration under international investment agreements: A guide to the key issues (Oxford, New York 2010), pp. 63–88. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  73. Ortino, Federico, ‘Transparency of investment awards’ in: Junji Nakagawa (ed), Transparency in International Trade and Investment Dispute Settlement (London 2012), pp. 119–158. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  74. Palmeter, David/Mavroidis, Petros C, Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization, (The Hague 1999). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  75. Paparinskis, Martins/Howley, Jessica, ‘Article 5. Submission by a non-disputing Party to the treaty’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 196–226. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  76. Parlett, Kate, ‘Diplomatic Protection and Investment Arbitration’ in: Rainer Hofmann and Christian J Tams (eds), International Investment Law and General International Law: From Clinical Isolation to Systemic Integration? (Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung, Baden-Baden 2011), pp. 211–229. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  77. Pernice, Ingolf, ‘Part IIII: Study on International Investment Protection Agreements and EU Law 132’ in: Pieter J Kuijper and others (eds), Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in the EU's international investment agreements: Study (Luxembourg 2014), pp. 132–164. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  78. Qureshi, Asif H/Ziegler, Andreas R, International Economic Law, (3rd edn. London 2011). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  79. Reinisch, August, ‘Chapter VI: Investment Arbitration - The Role of Precedent in ICSID Arbitration’ in: Christian Klausegger and Peter Klein (eds), Austrian Arbitration Yearbook (2008), pp. 495–510. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  80. Reinisch, August, ‘Internationales Investitionsschutzrecht’ in: Christian Tietje and Horst-Peter Götting (eds), Internationales Wirtschaftsrecht (Berlin 2009), pp. 398–434. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  81. Reinisch, August, ‘Putting the Pieces Together … an EU Model BIT?’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 679–704. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  82. Reinisch, August, ‘Most Favoured Nation Treatment’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 807–845. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  83. Reinisch, August/Malintoppi, Loretta, ‘Methods of Dispute Resolution’ in: Peter T Muchlinski (ed), The Oxford handbook of international investment law (Oxford 2008), pp. 692–720. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  84. Richman, Lisa M, ‘NAFTA in Transition, The current state of play and what comes next’ in: Barton Legum (ed), The Investment Treaty Arbitration Review (4th edn2019), pp. 352–381. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  85. Ruscalla, Gabriele, ‘Transparency in International Arbitration, Any (Concrete) Need to Codify the Standard?’ Groningen Journal of International Law (GroJIL) 2015, pp. 1–26. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  86. Sacerdoti, Giorgio, ‘The Proliferation of BITs, Conflicts of Treaties, Proceedings and Awards’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 127–136. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  87. Salacuse, Jeswald W, ‘Explanations for the Increased Recourse to Treaty-Based Investment Dispute Settlement, Resolving the Struggle of Life Against Form?’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 105–125. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  88. Sasson, Monique, ‘Investment Arbitration, Procedure’ in: Marc Bungenberg (ed), International investment law: A handbook (Baden-Baden 2015), pp. 1288–1372. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  89. Schefer, Krista N, ‘Article 1. Scope of application’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 28–63. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  90. Scherer, Maxi/Gehring, Markus/Euler, Dimitrij, ‘Introduction’ in: Dimitrij Euler and others (eds), Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL Rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration (Cambridge 2015), pp. 1–6. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  91. Schill, Stephan W, ‘International Investment Law and the Host State's Power to Handle Economic Crises’ 24 Journal of International Arbitration 2007, pp. 265–286. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  92. Schill, Stephan W, ‘System-Building in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Lawmaking’ in: Armin v Bogdandy and Ingo Venzke (eds), International judicial lawmaking: On public authority and democratic legitimation in global governance (Heidelberg 2012), pp. 133–177. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  93. Schill, Stephan W, ‘Editorial: Five Times Transparency in International Investment Law’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 363–374. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  94. Schill, Stephan W, ‘Ordering Paradigms in International Investment Law, Bilateralism, Multilateralism, Multilateralization’ in: Zachary Douglas, Joost Pauwelyn and Jorge E Viñuales (eds), The foundations of international investment law: Bringing theory into practice (Oxford 2014), pp. 109–141. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  95. Schill, Stephan W, ‘Editorial: The Mauritius Convention on Transparency, A Piece of Constitutional Reform of the International Investment Regime’ 16 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2015, pp. 201–204. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  96. Schreuer, Christoph and others, The ICSID convention: A commentary (2nd edn. Cambridge 2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  97. Shelton, Dinah, ‘The Participation of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Judicial Proceedings’ 88 American Journal of International Law (AJIL) 1994, pp. 611–642. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  98. Simões, Fernando D, ‘A Guardian and a Friend?, The European Commission's Participation in Investment Arbitration’ 25 Michigan State International Law Review (Michigan State ILR) 2017, pp. 234–303. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  99. Sornarajah, M, ‘A Coming Crisis, Expansionary Trends in Investment Treaty Arbitration’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 39–79. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  100. Stern, Brigitte, ‘The Intervention of Private Entities and States as "Friends of the Court" in WTO Dispute Settlement’ in: Patrick F Macrory, Arthur E Appleton and Michael G Plummer (eds), The World Trade Organization: Legal, economic and political analysis (New York, NY 2005), pp. 1427–1458. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  101. Subedi, Surya P, International investment law: Reconciling policy and principle (2nd edn. Oxford 2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  102. Swan, Alan C, ‘Ethyl Corporation v. Canada, Award on Jurisdiction’ 94 American Journal of International Law (AJIL) 2000, pp. 159–166. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  103. Tams, Christian J, ‘Procedural Aspects of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: The Emergence of a European Approach?’ 15 Journal of World Investment & Trade (JoWIT) 2014, pp. 585–611. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  104. Tao, Lifeng/Shen, Wei, ‘The Gap Between the EU and China on the ISDS Mechanisms in Context of the EU-China BIT Negotiations, Evolving Status and Underlying Logic’ 48 Hong Kong Law Journal (HKLJ) 2018, pp. 1159–1214. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  105. Tracton, Michael K, ‘Provisions in the New Generation of U.S. Investment Agreements to Achieve Transparency and Coherence in Investor-State Dispute Settlement’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 201–212. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  106. Tung, Sherlin H/Lin, Brian (Po Yen), ‘More Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration, To have or not to have’ 11 Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal (CAA) 2018, pp. 21–44. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  107. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), ‘UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2020, Economic trends’ https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tdstat45_FS09_en.pdf. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  108. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), World Investment Report 2018: Investment and New Industrial Policies (New York, Geneva 2018). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  109. van Harten, Gus/Loughlin, Martin, ‘Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law’ 17 European Journal of International Law (EJIL) 2006, pp. 121–150. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  110. VanDuzer, Anthony J, ‘Enhancing the Procedural Legitimacy of Investor-State Arbitration Through Transparency and Amicus Curiae Participation’ 52 McGill Law Journal 2007, pp. 681–723. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  111. Vierucci, Luisa, ‘NGOs before international courts and tribunals’ in: Pierre-Marie Dupuy and Luisa Vierucci (eds), NGOs in international law: Efficiency in flexibility? (Cheltenham, Northampton 2008), pp. 155–180. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  112. Waibel, Michael, ‘International Investment Law and Treaty Interpretation’ in: Rainer Hofmann and Christian J Tams (eds), International Investment Law and General International Law: From Clinical Isolation to Systemic Integration? (Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung, Baden-Baden 2011), pp. 29–52. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  113. Wilson, Bruce, ‘The WTO dispute settlement system and its operation, a brief overview of the first ten years’ in: Rufus H Yerxa and Bruce Wilson (eds), Key issues in WTO dispute settlement: The first ten years (Cambridge 2005), pp. 15–24. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  114. Wilson, Timothy R, ‘Trade Rules: Ethyl Corporation v. Canada (NAFTA Chapter 11)’ 6 Law and Business Reviews of the Americas 2000, pp. 52–71. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  115. World Trade Organization, A handbook on the WTO dispute settlement system, (Cambridge 2004). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  116. Yannaca-Small, Katia, ‘Improving the System of Investor-State Dispute Settlement’ in: Karl P Sauvant and Michael Chiswick-Patterson (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (Oxford 2008), pp. 223–228. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  117. Yannaca-Small, Katia, ‘Annulment of ICSID Awards, Limited Scope But is There Potential?’ in: Katia Yannaca-Small (ed), Arbitration under international investment agreements: A guide to the key issues (Oxford, New York 2010), pp. 603–634. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  118. Yanovich, Alan/Zdouc, Werner, ‘Procedural and Evidentiary Issues’ in: Daniel L Bethlehem (ed), The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law (Oxford 2009), pp. 345–377. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  119. Yu, Hong-Lin, ‘Who Is in - Who Is out, How the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules Can Influence the Upcoming Amendments of the ICSID Arbitration Rules’ 11 Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal (CAA) 2018, pp. 45–72. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  120. Yu, Hong-Lin/Giupponi, Belen O, ‘The Pandora's Box Effects under the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules’ Journal of Business Law 2016, pp. 347–372. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984
  121. Zlatanska, Elina, ‘To Publish, or Not To Publish Arbitral Awards: That is the Question’ 81 The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management (Int J Arb) 2015, pp. 25–37. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783748933984

Similar publications

from the series "Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung"
Cover of book: Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Book Titles No access
Justus Schmidt
Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Cover of book: Der Deutsche Kohleausstieg im Kontext des völkerrechtlichen Investitionsschutzrechts
Book Titles No access
Espen Schneider
Der Deutsche Kohleausstieg im Kontext des völkerrechtlichen Investitionsschutzrechts
Cover of book: Autonome restriktive Maßnahmen der EU gegen Russland
Book Titles No access
Justin Samek
Autonome restriktive Maßnahmen der EU gegen Russland
Cover of book: Europäisches Wettbewerbsrecht und der Luftverkehr – ein passender Rechtsrahmen?
Book Titles No access
Alexander Heger
Europäisches Wettbewerbsrecht und der Luftverkehr – ein passender Rechtsrahmen?
Cover of book: Der Brexit und das Subventionsrecht
Book Titles No access
Ketty Getachew
Der Brexit und das Subventionsrecht

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 Open Athens
Don't have an account yet?
Register now

Cite publication

Download: RIS BibTex