When Sustainable Development Meets International Investment: Painful Collision or Necessary Contribution?
Agata Ferreira
Аннотация
International investment has increasingly been subject to controversies and debates. Never more so then when international investment law is faced with sustainable development issues, particularly in the context of international investment arbitration. Given the characteristics of international investment law regime, and in particular the nature of its dispute resolution mechanism, types of measures challenged in the tribunals and the magnitude of monetary compensations sought by investors and frequently awarded by the tribunals, sustainable development issues become notably visible and debatable. Since sustainable development became a prominent feature of major global initiatives, political agendas and social movements, international investment disputes involving sustainable development issues gain lots of international attention. This paper aims to highlight the controversies of some of the most prominent international investment arbitration cases relating to sustainable development issues.
Ключевые слова:
international investment law, sustainable development, international investment tribunal, investment disputesБиблиографические ссылки
Asian Agricultural Products Ltd. (AAPL) v. Republic of Sri Lanka, ICSID Case No. ARB/87/3, Award 27 June 1990.
Google Scholar
Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd v. Tanzania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22, Award 24 July 2008.
Google Scholar
Chevron Corporation and Texaco Petroleum Company v. The Republic of Ecuador, PCA Case No. 34877, Partial Award on the merits 30 March 2010, Final Award 31 August 2011.
Google Scholar
Compañía del Desarrollo de Santa Elena S.A. v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/96/1, Final Award 17 February 2000.
Google Scholar
Gold Reserve Inc. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, Award 22 September 2014.
Google Scholar
Guzman, A. (1997). Why LDCs Sign Treaties That Hurt Them: Explaining the Popularity of Bilateral Investment Treaties. Virginia Journal of International Law 38: 639.
Google Scholar
Hulley Enterprises Ltd. v. Russian Federation, PCA Case No. AA 226, Final Award 18 July 2014.
Google Scholar
Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1 (NAFTA), Award 30 August 2000.
Google Scholar
Methanex v. United States, UNCITRAL, Final Award of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction and Merits, 3 August 2005.
Google Scholar
Newcombe, A.; Paradell, L. (2009). Law and Practice of Investment Treaties. Kluwer Law International.
Google Scholar
North American Free Trade Agreement between Canada, The United States and Mexico signed on 17 December 1992 and entered into force on 1 January 1994.
Google Scholar
Occidental Petroleum Corporation and Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. Republic of Ecuador (II), ICSID Case No. ARB/06/11, Award 5 October 2012.
Google Scholar
Pac Rim Cayman LLC v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/12, Pac Rim Cayman Llc’s Memorial on the Merits and Quantum, 29 March 2013; The Republic of El Salvador Counter Memorial on the Merits, 10 January 2014
Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. (2000). At the Edge of Chaos? Foreign Investment Law as a Complex Adaptive System, How it Emerged and How it Can Be Reformed. ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal 29: 372-418.
Google Scholar
Peter A. Allard v. The Government of Barbados, PCA Case No. 2012-06.
Google Scholar
Sornarajah, M. (2010). The International Law on Foreign Investment, Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. (2003) The Roaring Nineties: A New History of the World's Most Prosperous Decade. New York: Norton.
Google Scholar
Subedi, S. (2012). International Investment Law: Reconciling Policy and Principle. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Google Scholar
Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed, S. A. v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/2, Award 29 May 2003.
Google Scholar
United Nations. Conference on Trade and Development. (2015). World Investment Report 2015: Reforming International Investment Governance. New York: United Nations. Available at: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2015_en.pdf. Accessed on 27 June 2017.
Google Scholar
Venezuela Holdings B.V. and others v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/27, Award 9 October 2014.
Google Scholar
Veteran Petroleum Limited v. The Russian Federation, PCA Case No. AA 228, Final Award 18 July 2014.
Google Scholar
Weiler, T. (2005). International Law and Arbitration Leading Cases from the ICSID, NAFTA and Bilateral Treaties and Customary International Law. London, England: Cameron May.
Google Scholar
Windstream Energy LLC v. The Government of Canada, Canada´s Response to the Notice of Arbitration (Amended), 5 December 2013.
Google Scholar
Yukos Universal Limited (Isle of Man) v. The Russian Federation, PCA Case No. AA 227, Final Award 18 July 2014
Google Scholar
