Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility

The case study of investment treaty arbitration provides an opportunity to examine whether and how the invocation of responsibility by a non-state actor has affected secondary rules of state responsibility. This article takes the analytical perspective of investors, capable of being perceived as rig... Deskribapen osoa

Egile nagusia: Paparinskis, Martins
Formatua: Artikulua
Hizkuntza: Ingelesa
Argitaratua: Oxford University Press 2013
Testu osoa: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=4312136
Etiketak: Erantsi etiketa bat
Etiketarik gabe, Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen!
Azalaren irudirik gabe QR Kodea
Gorde:
id
dialnet-ar-18-ART0000568445
recordtype
dialnet
spelling
dialnet-ar-18-ART00005684452013-07-17Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State ResponsibilityPaparinskis, MartinsThe case study of investment treaty arbitration provides an opportunity to examine whether and how the invocation of responsibility by a non-state actor has affected secondary rules of state responsibility. This article takes the analytical perspective of investors, capable of being perceived as right-holders (by reference to human and consular rights), beneficiaries (by reference to the law of treaties rules on third states), or agents (by reference to diplomatic protection). The shift from the state to the investor as the entity invoking responsibility for the breach of investment treaties seems to have influenced the law of state responsibility in a number of distinct ways. The apparent disagreement about the law of state responsibility may sometimes properly relate to questions of treaty interpretation, while in other cases rules from an inter-state context are applied verbatim. In other cases, the different perspectives lead to importantly different conclusions regarding circumstances precluding wrongfulness, elements of remedies, waiver of rights, and, possibly, interpretative relevance of diplomatic protection rules. The overall thesis is that conceptual challenges faced by investment arbitration may be illuminated by the solutions formed by the regimes that provided the background for its creation.Oxford University Press2013text (article)http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=4312136(Revista) ISSN 0938-5428European journal of international law = Journal europeen de droit international, ISSN 0938-5428, Vol. 24, Nº 2, 2013, pags. 617-647engLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI
institution
Dialnet
collection
Dialnet AR
source
European journal of international law = Journal europeen de droit international, ISSN 0938-5428, Vol. 24, Nº 2, 2013, pags. 617-647
language
English
description
The case study of investment treaty arbitration provides an opportunity to examine whether and how the invocation of responsibility by a non-state actor has affected secondary rules of state responsibility. This article takes the analytical perspective of investors, capable of being perceived as right-holders (by reference to human and consular rights), beneficiaries (by reference to the law of treaties rules on third states), or agents (by reference to diplomatic protection). The shift from the state to the investor as the entity invoking responsibility for the breach of investment treaties seems to have influenced the law of state responsibility in a number of distinct ways. The apparent disagreement about the law of state responsibility may sometimes properly relate to questions of treaty interpretation, while in other cases rules from an inter-state context are applied verbatim. In other cases, the different perspectives lead to importantly different conclusions regarding circumstances precluding wrongfulness, elements of remedies, waiver of rights, and, possibly, interpretative relevance of diplomatic protection rules. The overall thesis is that conceptual challenges faced by investment arbitration may be illuminated by the solutions formed by the regimes that provided the background for its creation.
format
Article
author
Paparinskis, Martins
spellingShingle
Paparinskis, Martins
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
author-letter
Paparinskis, Martins
title
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
title_short
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
title_full
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
title_fullStr
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
title_full_unstemmed
Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility
title_sort
investment treaty arbitration and the (new) law of state responsibility
publisher
Oxford University Press
publishDate
2013
url
http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=4312136
_version_
1492287509950889984
score
11.791029