Search

The prominence of state-controlled entities (SCEs) in foreign direct investment (FDI) flows has created multilayer regulatory challenges. The nature of SCEs and geo-economic considerations related to their investments have exacerbated investment-related concerns and, since the global financial crisis and during the global pandemic, triggered legal reforms. Concurrently, SCEs have increasingly relied on international investment arbitration to solve their disputes. This Article examines the role of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in resolving cases brought by an increasing number of sovereign investors. The Article begins with a linguistic analysis of the ICSID Convention's relevant provisions, which lack a definitive regulatory position, and then reviews historical and drafting documents showing the position of some states that participated in the negotiations. Part III uncovers new cases and further examines understudied ones, and introduces a holistic and systematic analytical study of the case law, drawing lessons from consistencies in the awards. In Part IV, the awards are grouped, focusing on salient issues deriving from the diverse factual and legal elements of the cases. Initially, Part IV focuses on the first ICSID case in which a state-owned enterprise acts as a claimant. The analysis continues with the first application of the Broches test, an examination of awards in which investors were operating for little or no profit, and a review of awards in which sovereign investors were treated as any other privately owned investor. Last, the Part reviews the particularities of Chinese SCEs in FDI flows and ends with an assessment of the role of sovereign wealth funds and related awards. A comprehensive evaluation of the case law reveals that European SCEs have massively relied on the ICSID system, in contrast with Chinese SCEs that have made marginal use of it. Part V explains the relevance of the consistent approaches and argues that ICSID tribunals have established a jurisprudence constante in dealing with SCEs that confirms their access as claimants in investor-state disputes. Conversely, Part VI provides innovative approaches and instruments to assess the owner's role in sovereign investors' transactions and prevent distortions of the Centre's jurisdiction. The last Part summarizes the research findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The governing law of arbitration agreements determines the validity of an arbitration agreement and equally the entire arbitration. However, there is huge disagreement around the world as to the appropriate choice-of-law rules for deciding this governing law, particularly between rules favoring the governing law of the underlying contract (represented by the English approach) and the curial law (represented by the Chinese approach). By comparing the choice-of-law rules of these two jurisdictions, the authors argue that this disagreement is futile and unnecessary because both jurisdictions' choice-of-law rules are pro-validity in substance and likely lead to the arbitration agreement being upheld. There is, therefore, no urgency to change the status quo by asking one jurisdiction to follow another's choice-of-law approach. The authors conducted empirical research on relevant Chinese judicial decisions to add further depth to the comparison. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing examples from international environmental law, sustainable development, and corporate social responsibility, this Article examines the evolving role of international investment arbitration in the enforcement of non-binding soft law rules of international law. In doing so, the Article explains how investment tribunals can, and have been called upon to, interpret and, paradoxically, enforce soft law instruments. The Article calls for reevaluation of the nature of soft law and the role of investor-state dispute settlement in international rulemaking and enforcement. It also argues that for international environmental law and law on sustainable development, where the lack of an enforcement mechanism has long been identified as the single major weakness of the system, investor-state dispute settlement might be a viable option for increasing compliance with and enforcement of international law obligations of the sovereign states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globalization and international economic governance have promoted dialogue and interaction among nations, potentially increasing cultural diversity and providing the funds to recover and preserve cultural heritage. However, these phenomena can also jeopardize cultural diversity. Foreign direct investments in the extraction of natural resources have the potential to change cultural landscapes, destroy monuments, and erase memories. In parallel, international investment law constitutes a legally binding and highly effective regime that demands that states promote and facilitate foreign direct investment. Does the existing legal framework adequately protect cultural heritage vis-à-vis the economic interests of foreign investors? To address this question, this Article complements traditional tools of legal analysis with a novel, interdisciplinary, philosophical perspective. This Article relies on the thought of Simone Weil (1909-1943) to examine how cultural and economic forces can be balanced in international law. A philosopher, mystic, and resistance fighter, Weil was a defining figure of the twentieth century. While no study has highlighted the relevance of her thought for international law yet, her philosophy can help clarify legal concepts, reflect on what principles ought to be accepted, and identify future directions of the field. This Article relies on her philosophy for investigating the interplay between foreign investments and cultural heritage in international investment law and arbitration. In light of Weil's philosophical insights, this Article also examines recent arbitrations and proposes three legal tools to foster a better balance between economic and cultural interests in international investment law and arbitration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]