Investment treaty interpretation and customary investment law: Preliminary remarks

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139043809.009

4 - Investment treaty interpretation and customary investment law: Preliminary remarks

from Part II - Shifts in fundamental character

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 December 2011

Martins Paparinskis

Edited by

Chester Brown and

Kate Miles

Show author details

Chester Brown: Affiliation:
University of Sydney
Kate Miles: Affiliation:
University of Sydney

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

The historical development of investment protection law has resulted in a somewhat peculiar interplay of different treaty and customary law strata. As has been suggested elsewhere:

the shift has been away from vague and crude substantive rules (set out in customary law, general principles and evocations of equity) discretionarily enforced by the home State, and in the direction of ‘treatified’ law of investment protection, implemented by means of investor–State arbitration . . . The results of the more recent efforts of [treaty] law-making sometimes accept and incorporate the classic [customary] rules; sometimes clarify the classic ambiguities or replace the unsatisfactory solutions; sometimes permit different approaches in parallel; and quite often maintain constructive ambiguity regarding the precise relationship between different rules.

Particularly during the last decade, States, investment treaty tribunals and legal writers have grappled with perhaps not entirely foreseen theoretical and practical implications of the relationship between investment rules set out in treaty and customary law. Different facets of the relationship raise different legal questions, ranging from the more traditional inquiries about lawmaking (and the contribution of treaties to custom) to perspectives of conflict (and the exclusion of custom by treaties) and interpretation (of treaties by reference to custom). This chapter engages in the latter exercise, relying on the practice and case law of the last decade to suggest an approach that an interpreter of an investment treaty should take regarding customary investment protection law.

Type: Chapter
Information: Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration , pp. 65 - 96

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139043809.009 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Paparinskis, M.‘Investment arbitration and the law of countermeasures’British Yearbook of International Law 79 2008 264CrossRef Google Scholar

Lowenfeld, A. F.‘Investment agreements and international law’Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 42 2003 123Google Scholar

Schwebel, S. M.‘The influence of bilateral investment treaties on customary international law’Proceedings of the American Society of International Law 98 2004 27Google Scholar

E. Alvarez, J.‘A BIT on custom’New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 42 2010 17Google Scholar

Douglas, Z.‘The hybrid foundations of investment treaty arbitration’British Yearbook of International Law 74 2003 151CrossRef Google Scholar

Juratowitch, B.‘The relationship between diplomatic protection and investment treaties’ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal 23 2008 10CrossRef Google Scholar

Douglas, Z.The International Law of Investment ClaimsCambridge University Press 2009 95CrossRef Google Scholar

Douglas, Z.‘Other specific regimes of responsibility: Investment treaty arbitration and ICSID’Crawford, J.The Law of International ResponsibilityOxford University Press 2010 816Google Scholar

McLachlan, C.‘Investment treaties and general international law’International and Comparative Law Quarterly 57 2008 361CrossRef Google Scholar

Paparinskis, M.‘Regulatory expropriation and sustainable development’Gehring, M. W.Cordonnier-Segger, M.-C.Newcombe, A.Sustainable Development in International Investment LawThe HagueKluwer 2011 295Google Scholar

Paparinskis, M‘Investment protection law and sources of law: A critical look’Proceedings of the American Society of International Law 103 2009 76Google Scholar

van Aaken, A.‘Fragmentation of international law: The case of international investment law’Finnish Yearbook of International Law 17 2008 91Google Scholar

Hirsch, M.‘Interactions between investment and non-investment obligations in international investment law’Schreuer, C.Oxford Handbook of International Investment LawOxford University Press 2008Google Scholar

Simma, B.Kill, T.‘Harmonizing investment protection and international human rights: first Steps towards a Methodology’Binder, C.International Investment Law for the 21st Century: Essays in honour of Christoph SchreuerOxford University Press 2009 678CrossRef Google Scholar

Crawford, J.‘Continuity and discontinuity in international dispute settlement’Binder, C.International Investment Law for the 21st Century: Essays in honour of Christoph SchreuerOxford University Press 2009 801CrossRef Google Scholar

Weil, P.‘Le droit international en quête de son identité’Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International 236 1992 9Google Scholar

Pauwelyn, J.Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO law relates to other rules of international lawCambridge University Press 2003 253CrossRef Google Scholar

McLachlan, C.‘The principle of systemic integration and Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention’International and Comparative Law Quarterly 54 2005 279CrossRef Google Scholar

French, D.‘Treaty interpretation and the incorporation of extraneous legal rules’International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55 2006 281CrossRef Google Scholar

Sorel, J.-Mc.‘Article 31: Convention de 1969’Cortien, O.Klein, P.Les Conventions de Vienne sur le droit des traités: Commentaires article par articleBruxellesBruylant 2006 1323Google Scholar

Gardiner, R.Treaty InterpretationOxford University Press 2008Google Scholar

van Damme, I.Treaty Interpretation by the WTO Appellate BodyOxford University Press 2009CrossRef Google Scholar

Villiger, M. E.Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of TreatiesMartinus Nijhoff PublishersLeiden/Boston 2009 432Google Scholar

Abi-Saab, G.‘The appellate body and treaty interpretation’Sacerdoti, G.The WTO at Ten: The contribution of the dispute settlement systemCambridge University Press 2006 463Google Scholar

Marceau, G.‘Conflict of norms and conflict of jurisdictions: The relationship between WTO law and agreements and other treaties’World Trade Journal 35 2001 1081CrossRef Google Scholar

Berman, F.‘Treaty interpretation in a judicial context’Yale Journal of International Law 29 2004 315Google Scholar

Mendelson, M.‘Runaway train: The “continuous nationality” rule from the case to ’Weiler, T.International Investment Law and Arbitration: Leading cases from the ICSID, NAFTA, bilateral treaties and customary international lawCameron May 2005 97Google Scholar

McLachlan, C.Shore, L.Weiniger, M.International Investment Arbitration: Substantive principlesOxford University Press 2007 151CrossRef Google Scholar

Paulsson, J.‘Note – v. , ICSID Additional Facility Case No. ARB/AF/98/3 – Continuous Nationality in Loewen’Arbitration International 20 2004 213CrossRef Google Scholar

Leben, C.‘La Responsabilité internationale de l'état sur le fondement des traités de promotion et de protection des investissements’Annuaire Française de Droit International 50 2004 683CrossRef Google Scholar

Wood, M.‘The International Tribunal for Law of the Sea and General International Law’International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 22 2007 351CrossRef Google Scholar

Tudor, I.The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in the International Law of Foreign InvestmentOxford University Press 2008 54CrossRef Google Scholar

Alvarez, J. E.‘The factors driving and constraining the incorporation of international law in WTO adjudication’Janow, M. E.The WTO: Governance, dispute settlement & developing countriesNew YorkJuris Publishing Inc 2008 622Google Scholar

Crawford, J.‘ILC's Articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts: A retrospect’American Journal of International Law 96 2002 874CrossRef Google Scholar

Bjorklund, A. K.‘Private rights and public international law: Why competition among international economic law tribunals is not working’Hastings International Law Journal 59 2007 241Google Scholar

Borchard, E.Diplomatic Protection of Citizens AbroadNew YorkThe Banks Law Publishing Co 1915 471Google Scholar

Sereni, A. P.‘La Représentation en droit international’Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International 73 1948 69Google Scholar

Schreuer, C.The ICSID Convention: A commentaryCambridge University Press 2009 186CrossRef Google Scholar

Roberts, A.‘Power and persuasion in investment treaty interpretation: The dual role of States’American Journal of International Law 104 2010 179CrossRef Google Scholar

Paparinskis, M.‘: A friend of investment protection law’Baltic Yearbook of International Law 8 2008 105Google Scholar

Parlett, K.‘Role of diplomatic protection in the protection of foreign investments’Cambridge Law Journal 66 2007 533CrossRef Google Scholar

Schreuer, C. H.‘Fair and equitable treatment (FET): Interactions with other standards’Transnational Dispute Management 4 2007 10Google Scholar

Freeman, A. V.The International Responsibility of States for Denial of JusticeLondonLongmans, Green and Co 1938Google Scholar

Beckett, W. E.‘Diplomatic claims in respect of injuries to companies’Transactions of the Grotius Society 17 1931 175Google Scholar

Burke-White, W. W.von Staden, A.‘Investment protection in extraordinary times: The interpretation and application of non-precluded measures provisions in bilateral investment treaties’Virginia Journal of International Law 48 2008 307Google Scholar

Alvarez, J. E.Khamsi, K.‘The Argentine crisis and foreign investors: A glimpse into the heart of the investment regime’Yearbook of International Investment Law Policy 1 2008 379Google Scholar

Binder, C.‘Changed circumstances in investment law: Interfaces between the law of treaties and the law of State responsibility with a special focus on the Argentine crisis’Binder, C.International Investment Law for the 21st Century: Essays in honour of Christoph SchreuerOxford University Press 2009 608CrossRef Google Scholar

Kurtz, J.‘Adjudging the exceptional at international law: Security, public order and financial crisis’International and Comparative Law Quarterly 59 2010 325CrossRef Google Scholar

Paparinskis, M.‘Equivalent primary rules and differential secondary rules: Countermeasures in WTO and investment protection law’Broude, T.Shany, Y.Multi-Sourced Equivalent NormsOxfordHart Publishing 2011 274Google Scholar

Allot, P.Eunomia: A new order for a new worldOxford University Press 1990 5Google Scholar

Allot, P.The Health of NationsCambridge University Press 2002 415CrossRef Google Scholar

Juillard, P.‘L'Évolution des sources du droit des investissements’Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International 250 1994 9Google Scholar

Jennings, R. Y.‘State contracts in international law’British Yearbook of International Law 37 1961 156Google Scholar

Crawford, J.Grant, T.‘Responsibility of States for injuries to foreigners’Grant, J. P.Barker, J. C.The Harvard Research in International Law: Contemporary analysis and appraisalW. S. Hein & CoNew York 2007 77Google Scholar

Greenwood, C.‘State responsibility for the decisions of national courts’Fitzmaurice, M.Sarooshi, D.Issues of State Responsibility before International Judicial InstitutionsHart PublishingOxford 2004 57Google Scholar

Broches, A.‘The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States’Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International 136 1972 331Google Scholar

Oppenheim, L.International LawLongmans, Green, and CoLondon 1905 341Google Scholar

Higgins, R‘Conceptual thinking about the individual in international law’New York Law School Law Review 24 1978 11Google Scholar