The role of procedure in the development of investment law

The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Introduction Investment law, one of the fastest growing areas of international law, has emerged from the proliferation of bilateral and multilateral international investment agreements (IIAs). More than 2, 600 IIAs have been negotiated, involving almost all countries. Most of these agreements provide for international arbitration as the means to settle disputes between investors and the host country. Many scholars argue that the emergence of multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes and of treaties providing for investment arbitration may be exacerbating what is called a ‘fragmentation’ process of international law. Today, economic actors seeking relief under international law may be forced to go to different courts or tribunals in order to seek compliance (i.e. conformity to the rules of a particular regime, including dispute-resolution and interpretation provisions) and/or economic compensation for the State's breach of its obligations. This may be increasing the risk that tribunals will come to inconsistent, conflicting and incompatible decisions. Faced with this danger, the question addressed in this chapter is as follows: in the absence of a homogeneous, hierarchical meta-system capable of doing away with problems derived from multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes, can agreed procedural tools be a source of co-ordination?

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationEvolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages339-368
Number of pages30
ISBN (Print)9781139043809, 9781107014688
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

NAFTA
international law
Law
arbitration
economics
conformity
treaty
fragmentation
proliferation
investor
obligation
regime
interpretation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Puig, S. (2011). The role of procedure in the development of investment law: The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA. In Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration (pp. 339-368). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023

The role of procedure in the development of investment law : The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA. / Puig, Sergio.

Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press, 2011. p. 339-368.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Puig, S 2011, The role of procedure in the development of investment law: The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA. in Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press, pp. 339-368. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023
Puig S. The role of procedure in the development of investment law: The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA. In Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press. 2011. p. 339-368 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023
Puig, Sergio. / The role of procedure in the development of investment law : The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA. Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press, 2011. pp. 339-368
@inbook{e91c25c8167c4d1f8ff569395f54828b,
title = "The role of procedure in the development of investment law: The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA",
abstract = "Introduction Investment law, one of the fastest growing areas of international law, has emerged from the proliferation of bilateral and multilateral international investment agreements (IIAs). More than 2, 600 IIAs have been negotiated, involving almost all countries. Most of these agreements provide for international arbitration as the means to settle disputes between investors and the host country. Many scholars argue that the emergence of multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes and of treaties providing for investment arbitration may be exacerbating what is called a ‘fragmentation’ process of international law. Today, economic actors seeking relief under international law may be forced to go to different courts or tribunals in order to seek compliance (i.e. conformity to the rules of a particular regime, including dispute-resolution and interpretation provisions) and/or economic compensation for the State's breach of its obligations. This may be increasing the risk that tribunals will come to inconsistent, conflicting and incompatible decisions. Faced with this danger, the question addressed in this chapter is as follows: in the absence of a homogeneous, hierarchical meta-system capable of doing away with problems derived from multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes, can agreed procedural tools be a source of co-ordination?",
author = "Sergio Puig",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781139043809",
pages = "339--368",
booktitle = "Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - The role of procedure in the development of investment law

T2 - The case of section B of chapter 11 of NAFTA

AU - Puig, Sergio

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Introduction Investment law, one of the fastest growing areas of international law, has emerged from the proliferation of bilateral and multilateral international investment agreements (IIAs). More than 2, 600 IIAs have been negotiated, involving almost all countries. Most of these agreements provide for international arbitration as the means to settle disputes between investors and the host country. Many scholars argue that the emergence of multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes and of treaties providing for investment arbitration may be exacerbating what is called a ‘fragmentation’ process of international law. Today, economic actors seeking relief under international law may be forced to go to different courts or tribunals in order to seek compliance (i.e. conformity to the rules of a particular regime, including dispute-resolution and interpretation provisions) and/or economic compensation for the State's breach of its obligations. This may be increasing the risk that tribunals will come to inconsistent, conflicting and incompatible decisions. Faced with this danger, the question addressed in this chapter is as follows: in the absence of a homogeneous, hierarchical meta-system capable of doing away with problems derived from multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes, can agreed procedural tools be a source of co-ordination?

AB - Introduction Investment law, one of the fastest growing areas of international law, has emerged from the proliferation of bilateral and multilateral international investment agreements (IIAs). More than 2, 600 IIAs have been negotiated, involving almost all countries. Most of these agreements provide for international arbitration as the means to settle disputes between investors and the host country. Many scholars argue that the emergence of multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes and of treaties providing for investment arbitration may be exacerbating what is called a ‘fragmentation’ process of international law. Today, economic actors seeking relief under international law may be forced to go to different courts or tribunals in order to seek compliance (i.e. conformity to the rules of a particular regime, including dispute-resolution and interpretation provisions) and/or economic compensation for the State's breach of its obligations. This may be increasing the risk that tribunals will come to inconsistent, conflicting and incompatible decisions. Faced with this danger, the question addressed in this chapter is as follows: in the absence of a homogeneous, hierarchical meta-system capable of doing away with problems derived from multiple and varied mechanisms for the settlement of economic disputes, can agreed procedural tools be a source of co-ordination?

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933556263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933556263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023

DO - 10.1017/CBO9781139043809.023

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781139043809

SN - 9781107014688

SP - 339

EP - 368

BT - Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -