REGULATION PRINCIPLES AS SOURCE OF LEGAL RULE INTERPRETATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF BILATERAL AGREEMENTS ON CAPITAL INVESTMENTS’ PROTECTION)
Rubrics: INTERNATIONAL LAW
Authors:
Type:
Article
Pages:
from 0
to 0
Status:
Published
Received:
25.04.2016
Accepted:
04.05.2016
Published:
04.05.2016
Language:
Russian
Keywords:
Interpretation of the law, investment disputes, Washington convention, the principles of international Law, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs).
Abstract (English):
Protection of a foreign investor is usually based on the national Law of the State — participant of the investment dispute. This is envisaged by Article 42 of the Washington Convention on Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States of 1965. The same article allows applying in certain cases the principles and the rules of international law to settle the conflict. It is an ordinary ICSID practice to judge on the jurisdiction of the ICSID arbitration basing on the rule of bilateral investment agreements between the governments of States, which are the international agreements fixing mutually favourable investment regime between the States — Parties to the Agreement. The incorrect interpretation of the Articles of the Agreement leads to expansion of the sphere of jurisdiction of ICSID arbitration and the infringement of the basic principle of international law on respect of sovereignty of a State. Such interpretation also makes it difficult to apply the European Law as an applicable law in the settlement of investment disputes against the States – members of the European Union.
Protection of a foreign investor is usually based on the national Law of the State — participant of the investment dispute. This is envisaged by Article 42 of the Washington Convention on Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States of 1965. The same article allows applying in certain cases the principles and the rules of international law to settle the conflict. It is an ordinary ICSID practice to judge on the jurisdiction of the ICSID arbitration basing on the rule of bilateral investment agreements between the governments of States, which are the international agreements fixing mutually favourable investment regime between the States — Parties to the Agreement. The incorrect interpretation of the Articles of the Agreement leads to expansion of the sphere of jurisdiction of ICSID arbitration and the infringement of the basic principle of international law on respect of sovereignty of a State. Such interpretation also makes it difficult to apply the European Law as an applicable law in the settlement of investment disputes against the States – members of the European Union.
Keywords:
Interpretation of the law, investment disputes, Washington convention, the principles of international Law, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs).
Interpretation of the law, investment disputes, Washington convention, the principles of international Law, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs).
1. Papp K. von. Clash of “Autonomous Legal Order”: Can EU Member State Courts Bridge the Jurisdictional Devide Between Investment Tribunals and the ECJ? A Plea for Direct Referral from Investment Tribunals to the ECJ. Common Market Law Review. 2013. Vol. 50.
2. Wong J. The Subversion of State-to-State Investment Treaty Arbitration. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. 2014. V. 53.
3. Bazedov Yu. Vozrozhdenie protsessa unifikatsii prava: evropeyskoe dogovornoe pravo i ego elementy. Gosudarstvo i pravo. 2000. № 2.
