Indeterminacy Rules and Standards of Interpretation in ICSID Arbitration Panels. An analysis of Some of its Procedural Deficiencies Based on the Requirement of "Contribution to the Development of the Receiving State" as a Requirement for Access to its Jur
Published
Jan 19, 2018
Almetrics
Dimensions
Google Scholar
Francisco J. Leturia Infante
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1454-7408
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1454-7408
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Abstract
During the last decades we have seen a growing prominence by the judicial actors in interpretative issues, particularly in those related to indeterminateconcepts properto the international law and, even more particularly, to the fundamental rights. This work proposes that such growing judicial activism cannot be appreciated or justified with the same criteria as other issues so dissimilar like the conflicts between constitutional rights (which allow for a greater judicial construct) or the business and criminal cases
(when the adherence to the rules and the legal security is expected to be higher). To justify the foregoing, this work examines the fluctuating criteria drawn upon by the arbitration panels in the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) when assessing the system core criterion providing the access to its jurisdiction: the foreign investments. Based on the foregoing,aseries of measuresand precautions are indicated, which could be adopted to enhance the legal practicesand standards. Finally, this work includes an analysis of the role and the criteria that are to be required to the different courts in a global justice system.
Keywords
judicial activism, arbitral panels, legal practicesactivismo judicial, paneles arbitrales, prácticas jurídicas
References
Referencias bibliográficas. Libros
BANCO INTERNACIONAL DE RECONSTRUCCIÓN Y FOMENTO. Informe de los Directores Ejecutivos del Banco Internacional de Reconstrucción y Fomento acerca del Convenio sobre Arreglo de las Diferencias Relativas a Inversiones entre Estados y Nacionales de Otros Estados, Washington. Párrafo 27. 18 de marzo de 1965.
BELLEI, CARLOS, Arbitraje de Inversiones en América Latina: De la hostilidad a la búsqueda de nuevas alternativas, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
DOMINIQUE CARREAU, THIÉBAULT FLORY & PATRICK JUILLARD, Droit International Economique, Ed. L.G.D.J, 558-578 (1990).
EBERHARDT, P, OLIVE, C., AMOS T., y BUXTON, N., Profiting from injustice. How law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fueling an investing arbitrator boom (Corporate Europe Observatory and Transnational Institute, 2012).
FERNÁNDEZ ARROYO, DIEGO P., La transparencia como paradigma del arbitraje de inversiones, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
FUENTES, XIMENA & KLEIN, JOHANNA, Proceso de anulación en casos relacionados a países latinoamericanos, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
HEISKANEN VEIJO, Of Capital Import: the Denition of “Investment” in International Investment Law. En ANNE K. HOFFMANN, Protection of Foreign Investments through Modern Treaty Arbitration, Ed. Swiss Arbitration Association Special Series, 34, 71, (2010).
LETURIA I., FRANCISCO J., La contribución al desarrollo del Estado receptor como requisito de la noción de inversión: la experiencia de los países latinoamericanos, en Derecho Internacional de las inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas, (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
RUBINS, NOAH, The Notion of “Investment” in International Investment Arbitration, in Arbitrating Foreign Investment Disputes, 298 (NORBERT HORN & STEFAN KRÖLL, eds., Kluwer Law International, 2004).
SCHREUER, CHRISTOPH, The ICSID Convention: a commentary (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009).
SHIHATA, IBRAHIM F. I., Towards a greater depoliticization of investment disputes: the roles of ICSID and MIGA (The World Bank, Washington, 1992).
TANZI, ATTILA & CRISTIANI, FEDERICA, eds., International Investment Law and Practice, An Introductory Casebook (CEDAM, Buenos Aires, 2013).
Referencias bibliográficas. Revistas
GAILLARD, EMMANUEL, Identify or define? Reflections on the evolution of the concept of investment in ICSID practice, International Investment Law for the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Christoph Schreuer (2009).
MORTENSON, JULIAN DAVIS, The Meaning of “Investment”: ICSID´s Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law, Harvard International Law Journal, 51, 1 (2010).
SCHREUER, CHRISTOPH, Commentary on the ICSID Convention, ICSID Review, 11, 2 (1996).
STERN, BRIGITTE, The Contours of the Notion of Protected Investment, ICSID Review Foreign Investment Law Journal, 24 (2009).
Referencias bibliográficas. Casos de arbitraje internacional
Bit Italy and Morocco. Artículo 1. 18 de julio de 1990. Disponible en: http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA/mostRecent/treaty/2102 (3 de enero de 2018).
Bayindir Insaat Turizm Ticaret Ve Sanayi AS vs. Pakistan, ICASID. Case No. ARB 03/29, Decision on Jurisdiction (14 de noviembre de 2005). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/29
CMS Gas Transmission Company vs. Argentine, ICSID. Case No. ARB/01/8, Decision of the ad-hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment. Para. 312 (25 de septiembre de 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/01/8
Consorzio Groupement LESI-Dipenta vs. Algeria, ICSID. Case No. ARB/03/08. Award. Para. 13 (10 de enero de 2005). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/8
Fedax vs. Venezuela, ICSID. Case No. ARB/96/3, Award rendered. Para. 22 (9 de marzo de 1998). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/96/3
Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd. vs. Tanzania, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/22, Award. Para. 312 (24 de Julio de 2008). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/22
Generation Ukraine, INC. vs. Ukraine, ICSID. Case No. ARB/00/9, Award. (16 de septiembre de 2003). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/00/9
Helnan International Hotels A/S vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/19, Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction. Para. 77 (17 de octubre de 2006). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/19
Jan de Nul N.V. Dredging International N.V. vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/04/13, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 91-92 (16 de junio de 2006). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/04/13
Joy Mining Machinery Ltd. vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/03/11, Award on Jurisdiction. Para. 49-50 (6 de abril de 2014). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/11
Malaysian Historical Salvors SDN BHD vs. Malaysia, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/10, Award on Jurisdiction. Para. 55 (17 May 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/10
Malaysian Historical Salvors SDN BHD vs. Malaysia, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/10, Decision on the Aplication for Annulment. Para. 80 (16 de abril de 2009). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/10
Mr. Patrick Mitchell vs. Congo, ICSID. Case No. ARB/99/7, Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Award. Para. 33 (9 de febrero de 2004). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/99/7
Phoenix Action, LTD vs. e Czech Republic, ICSID. Case No. ARB/06/5, Award. Para. 85-86 (15 April 2009). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/06/5
Saipem SpA vs. Bangladesh, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/07, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures. Para. 99 (21 de marzo de 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/7
Salini Costruttori SpA. And Italstrade SpA vs. Kingdom of Morocco, ICSID. Case No.
ARB/00/4, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 43-49 (23 de julio 2001). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/00/4
Siemens A.G. vs. Argentina, ICSID. Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 81 (3 de agosto de 2004).Disponible en: ttps://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/02/8
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation vs. Chile, ICSID. Case No. ARB/98/2, Award. Para. 232-233 (8 de mayo de2008). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspxCaseNo=ARB/98/2
Referencias bibliográficas. Otros documentos
Convenio CIADI, reglamento y reglas. Artículo 25 (1). Abril 2006. Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Documents/resources/2006%20CRR_Spanish-final.pdf (1 de enero de 2018).
MOSES, MARGARET L, Reasoned Decisions in Arbitrator Challenges. III Yearbook on International Arbitration 199 (2013); Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2012-011, Julio 2012, At. 1.
BANCO INTERNACIONAL DE RECONSTRUCCIÓN Y FOMENTO. Informe de los Directores Ejecutivos del Banco Internacional de Reconstrucción y Fomento acerca del Convenio sobre Arreglo de las Diferencias Relativas a Inversiones entre Estados y Nacionales de Otros Estados, Washington. Párrafo 27. 18 de marzo de 1965.
BELLEI, CARLOS, Arbitraje de Inversiones en América Latina: De la hostilidad a la búsqueda de nuevas alternativas, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
DOMINIQUE CARREAU, THIÉBAULT FLORY & PATRICK JUILLARD, Droit International Economique, Ed. L.G.D.J, 558-578 (1990).
EBERHARDT, P, OLIVE, C., AMOS T., y BUXTON, N., Profiting from injustice. How law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fueling an investing arbitrator boom (Corporate Europe Observatory and Transnational Institute, 2012).
FERNÁNDEZ ARROYO, DIEGO P., La transparencia como paradigma del arbitraje de inversiones, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
FUENTES, XIMENA & KLEIN, JOHANNA, Proceso de anulación en casos relacionados a países latinoamericanos, en Derecho Internacional de las Inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
HEISKANEN VEIJO, Of Capital Import: the Denition of “Investment” in International Investment Law. En ANNE K. HOFFMANN, Protection of Foreign Investments through Modern Treaty Arbitration, Ed. Swiss Arbitration Association Special Series, 34, 71, (2010).
LETURIA I., FRANCISCO J., La contribución al desarrollo del Estado receptor como requisito de la noción de inversión: la experiencia de los países latinoamericanos, en Derecho Internacional de las inversiones en América Latina. Problemas y perspectivas, (Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016).
RUBINS, NOAH, The Notion of “Investment” in International Investment Arbitration, in Arbitrating Foreign Investment Disputes, 298 (NORBERT HORN & STEFAN KRÖLL, eds., Kluwer Law International, 2004).
SCHREUER, CHRISTOPH, The ICSID Convention: a commentary (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009).
SHIHATA, IBRAHIM F. I., Towards a greater depoliticization of investment disputes: the roles of ICSID and MIGA (The World Bank, Washington, 1992).
TANZI, ATTILA & CRISTIANI, FEDERICA, eds., International Investment Law and Practice, An Introductory Casebook (CEDAM, Buenos Aires, 2013).
Referencias bibliográficas. Revistas
GAILLARD, EMMANUEL, Identify or define? Reflections on the evolution of the concept of investment in ICSID practice, International Investment Law for the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Christoph Schreuer (2009).
MORTENSON, JULIAN DAVIS, The Meaning of “Investment”: ICSID´s Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law, Harvard International Law Journal, 51, 1 (2010).
SCHREUER, CHRISTOPH, Commentary on the ICSID Convention, ICSID Review, 11, 2 (1996).
STERN, BRIGITTE, The Contours of the Notion of Protected Investment, ICSID Review Foreign Investment Law Journal, 24 (2009).
Referencias bibliográficas. Casos de arbitraje internacional
Bit Italy and Morocco. Artículo 1. 18 de julio de 1990. Disponible en: http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA/mostRecent/treaty/2102 (3 de enero de 2018).
Bayindir Insaat Turizm Ticaret Ve Sanayi AS vs. Pakistan, ICASID. Case No. ARB 03/29, Decision on Jurisdiction (14 de noviembre de 2005). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/29
CMS Gas Transmission Company vs. Argentine, ICSID. Case No. ARB/01/8, Decision of the ad-hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment. Para. 312 (25 de septiembre de 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/01/8
Consorzio Groupement LESI-Dipenta vs. Algeria, ICSID. Case No. ARB/03/08. Award. Para. 13 (10 de enero de 2005). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/8
Fedax vs. Venezuela, ICSID. Case No. ARB/96/3, Award rendered. Para. 22 (9 de marzo de 1998). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/96/3
Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd. vs. Tanzania, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/22, Award. Para. 312 (24 de Julio de 2008). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/22
Generation Ukraine, INC. vs. Ukraine, ICSID. Case No. ARB/00/9, Award. (16 de septiembre de 2003). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/00/9
Helnan International Hotels A/S vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/19, Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction. Para. 77 (17 de octubre de 2006). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/19
Jan de Nul N.V. Dredging International N.V. vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/04/13, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 91-92 (16 de junio de 2006). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/04/13
Joy Mining Machinery Ltd. vs. Egypt, ICSID. Case No. ARB/03/11, Award on Jurisdiction. Para. 49-50 (6 de abril de 2014). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/03/11
Malaysian Historical Salvors SDN BHD vs. Malaysia, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/10, Award on Jurisdiction. Para. 55 (17 May 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/10
Malaysian Historical Salvors SDN BHD vs. Malaysia, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/10, Decision on the Aplication for Annulment. Para. 80 (16 de abril de 2009). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/10
Mr. Patrick Mitchell vs. Congo, ICSID. Case No. ARB/99/7, Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Award. Para. 33 (9 de febrero de 2004). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/99/7
Phoenix Action, LTD vs. e Czech Republic, ICSID. Case No. ARB/06/5, Award. Para. 85-86 (15 April 2009). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/06/5
Saipem SpA vs. Bangladesh, ICSID. Case No. ARB/05/07, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures. Para. 99 (21 de marzo de 2007). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/05/7
Salini Costruttori SpA. And Italstrade SpA vs. Kingdom of Morocco, ICSID. Case No.
ARB/00/4, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 43-49 (23 de julio 2001). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/00/4
Siemens A.G. vs. Argentina, ICSID. Case No. ARB/02/8, Decision on Jurisdiction. Para. 81 (3 de agosto de 2004).Disponible en: ttps://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspx?CaseNo=ARB/02/8
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation vs. Chile, ICSID. Case No. ARB/98/2, Award. Para. 232-233 (8 de mayo de2008). Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sp/Pages/cases/casedetail.aspxCaseNo=ARB/98/2
Referencias bibliográficas. Otros documentos
Convenio CIADI, reglamento y reglas. Artículo 25 (1). Abril 2006. Disponible en: https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Documents/resources/2006%20CRR_Spanish-final.pdf (1 de enero de 2018).
MOSES, MARGARET L, Reasoned Decisions in Arbitrator Challenges. III Yearbook on International Arbitration 199 (2013); Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2012-011, Julio 2012, At. 1.
How to Cite
Leturia Infante, F. J. (2018). Indeterminacy Rules and Standards of Interpretation in ICSID Arbitration Panels. An analysis of Some of its Procedural Deficiencies Based on the Requirement of "Contribution to the Development of the Receiving State" as a Requirement for Access to its Jur. Vniversitas, 67(136), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.vj136.inci
Issue
Section
Artículos