Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties: The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law
The fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision has leapt to prominence in the last 15 years as the principal ground of liability at issue in many if not most investment treaty arbitration claims. In debates about the impact of investment treaties on the right to regulate, FET is second only to inv...
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Elektronisch E-Book |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Paris
OECD Publishing
2017
|
| Schriftenreihe: | OECD Working Papers on International Investment
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | kostenfrei |
| Zusammenfassung: | The fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision has leapt to prominence in the last 15 years as the principal ground of liability at issue in many if not most investment treaty arbitration claims. In debates about the impact of investment treaties on the right to regulate, FET is second only to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) as the most-cited provision. This paper examines government action to address the balance between investor protection and the right to regulate by limiting fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law (MST-FET). The paper reviews the distinction between MST-FET clauses and autonomous FET clauses, and notes growing use of an express MST-FET approach in many regions. NAFTA governments' views about the nature of the MST-FET standard, how it is identified, and its content are then examined in detail. An initial focus on NAFTA, while limited, is justified due to many singularities in NAFTA, including numerous government interpretations of MST-FET since 1994, their availability to the public and the comparatively higher success rate of NAFTA governments in defending FET claims. The paper concludes with brief comparisons between the government views and the views of ISDS tribunals and commentators |
| Beschreibung: | 1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten) |
| DOI: | 10.1787/0a62034b-en |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000zc 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV047932179 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 007 | cr|uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220413s2017 xx o|||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1787/0a62034b-en |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (ZDB-13-SOC)061310662 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)1312704329 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV047932179 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e aacr | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-384 |a DE-91 |a DE-473 |a DE-824 |a DE-29 |a DE-739 |a DE-355 |a DE-20 |a DE-1028 |a DE-1049 |a DE-188 |a DE-521 |a DE-861 |a DE-898 |a DE-92 |a DE-573 |a DE-19 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Gaukrodger, David |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties |b The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |c David Gaukrodger |
| 264 | 1 | |a Paris |b OECD Publishing |c 2017 | |
| 300 | |a 1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten) | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a OECD Working Papers on International Investment | |
| 520 | |a The fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision has leapt to prominence in the last 15 years as the principal ground of liability at issue in many if not most investment treaty arbitration claims. In debates about the impact of investment treaties on the right to regulate, FET is second only to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) as the most-cited provision. This paper examines government action to address the balance between investor protection and the right to regulate by limiting fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law (MST-FET). The paper reviews the distinction between MST-FET clauses and autonomous FET clauses, and notes growing use of an express MST-FET approach in many regions. NAFTA governments' views about the nature of the MST-FET standard, how it is identified, and its content are then examined in detail. An initial focus on NAFTA, while limited, is justified due to many singularities in NAFTA, including numerous government interpretations of MST-FET since 1994, their availability to the public and the comparatively higher success rate of NAFTA governments in defending FET claims. The paper concludes with brief comparisons between the government views and the views of ISDS tribunals and commentators | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Finance and Investment | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1787/0a62034b-en |x Verlag |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a ZDB-13-SOC | ||
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033313673 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1818806027488854016 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | |
| adam_txt | |
| any_adam_object | |
| any_adam_object_boolean | |
| author | Gaukrodger, David |
| author_facet | Gaukrodger, David |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Gaukrodger, David |
| author_variant | d g dg |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV047932179 |
| collection | ZDB-13-SOC |
| ctrlnum | (ZDB-13-SOC)061310662 (OCoLC)1312704329 (DE-599)BVBBV047932179 |
| discipline | Wirtschaftswissenschaften |
| discipline_str_mv | Wirtschaftswissenschaften |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1787/0a62034b-en |
| format | Electronic eBook |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nam a2200000zc 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV047932179</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220413s2017 xx o|||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1787/0a62034b-en</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-13-SOC)061310662</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1312704329</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV047932179</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">aacr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-384</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-91</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-473</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-824</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-739</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-355</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-20</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-1028</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-1049</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-188</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-521</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-861</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-898</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-92</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-573</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gaukrodger, David</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties</subfield><subfield code="b">The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law</subfield><subfield code="c">David Gaukrodger</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Paris</subfield><subfield code="b">OECD Publishing</subfield><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">OECD Working Papers on International Investment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision has leapt to prominence in the last 15 years as the principal ground of liability at issue in many if not most investment treaty arbitration claims. In debates about the impact of investment treaties on the right to regulate, FET is second only to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) as the most-cited provision. This paper examines government action to address the balance between investor protection and the right to regulate by limiting fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law (MST-FET). The paper reviews the distinction between MST-FET clauses and autonomous FET clauses, and notes growing use of an express MST-FET approach in many regions. NAFTA governments' views about the nature of the MST-FET standard, how it is identified, and its content are then examined in detail. An initial focus on NAFTA, while limited, is justified due to many singularities in NAFTA, including numerous government interpretations of MST-FET since 1994, their availability to the public and the comparatively higher success rate of NAFTA governments in defending FET claims. The paper concludes with brief comparisons between the government views and the views of ISDS tribunals and commentators</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Finance and Investment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1787/0a62034b-en</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-13-SOC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033313673</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV047932179 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-03T19:34:58Z |
| indexdate | 2024-12-18T19:03:14Z |
| institution | BVB |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033313673 |
| oclc_num | 1312704329 |
| open_access_boolean | 1 |
| owner | DE-384 DE-91 DE-BY-TUM DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-824 DE-29 DE-739 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-20 DE-1028 DE-1049 DE-188 DE-521 DE-861 DE-898 DE-BY-UBR DE-92 DE-573 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| owner_facet | DE-384 DE-91 DE-BY-TUM DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-824 DE-29 DE-739 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-20 DE-1028 DE-1049 DE-188 DE-521 DE-861 DE-898 DE-BY-UBR DE-92 DE-573 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| physical | 1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten) |
| psigel | ZDB-13-SOC |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateSearch | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | OECD Publishing |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | OECD Working Papers on International Investment |
| spelling | Gaukrodger, David Verfasser aut Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law David Gaukrodger Paris OECD Publishing 2017 1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten) txt rdacontent c rdamedia cr rdacarrier OECD Working Papers on International Investment The fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision has leapt to prominence in the last 15 years as the principal ground of liability at issue in many if not most investment treaty arbitration claims. In debates about the impact of investment treaties on the right to regulate, FET is second only to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) as the most-cited provision. This paper examines government action to address the balance between investor protection and the right to regulate by limiting fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law (MST-FET). The paper reviews the distinction between MST-FET clauses and autonomous FET clauses, and notes growing use of an express MST-FET approach in many regions. NAFTA governments' views about the nature of the MST-FET standard, how it is identified, and its content are then examined in detail. An initial focus on NAFTA, while limited, is justified due to many singularities in NAFTA, including numerous government interpretations of MST-FET since 1994, their availability to the public and the comparatively higher success rate of NAFTA governments in defending FET claims. The paper concludes with brief comparisons between the government views and the views of ISDS tribunals and commentators Finance and Investment https://doi.org/10.1787/0a62034b-en Verlag kostenfrei Volltext |
| spellingShingle | Gaukrodger, David Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law Finance and Investment |
| title | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| title_auth | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| title_exact_search | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| title_full | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law David Gaukrodger |
| title_fullStr | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law David Gaukrodger |
| title_full_unstemmed | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law David Gaukrodger |
| title_short | Addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties |
| title_sort | addressing the balance of interests in investment treaties the limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| title_sub | The limitation of fair and equitable treatment provisions to the minimum standard of treatment under customary international law |
| topic | Finance and Investment |
| topic_facet | Finance and Investment |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1787/0a62034b-en |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gaukrodgerdavid addressingthebalanceofinterestsininvestmenttreatiesthelimitationoffairandequitabletreatmentprovisionstotheminimumstandardoftreatmentundercustomaryinternationallaw |