2011•SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Investment Arbitration as the ‘New Frontier'

Chester Brown

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

Since the Argentine financial crisis of 2001-2002, bilateral investment treaties (“BITs”) have increasingly come under the spotlight as a means by which foreign investors can enforce their rights against the host State of their investment. These rights come in the form of various substantive standards of protection, such as the protection against expropriation, the right to fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, national treatment, most-favoured nation treatment, and importantly, the right to bring a claim in international arbitration against the host State in the event that the investor considers that the State has breached its international obligations. This article considers the case of Argentina (which has faced over 40 claims under BITs in the last decade), and provides a concise review of the substantive and procedural protections available to investors under these international instruments. The article then considers some challenges faced by the regime for investment treaty arbitration, such as the problem of inconsistent decisions, multiple proceedings, and the perceived lack of transparency.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Since the Argentine financial crisis of 2001-2002, bilateral investment treaties (“BITs”) have increasingly come under the spotlight as a means by which foreign investors can enforce their rights against the host State of their investment. These rights come in the form of various substantive standards of protection, such as the protection against expropriation, the right to fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, national treatment, most-favoured nation treatment, and importantly, the right to bring a claim in international arbitration against the host State in the event that the investor considers that the State has breached its international obligations. This article considers the case of Argentina (which has faced over 40 claims under BITs in the last decade), and provides a concise review of the substantive and procedural protections available to investors under these international instruments. The article then considers some challenges faced by the regime for investment treaty arbitration, such as the problem of inconsistent decisions, multiple proceedings, and the perceived lack of transparency.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Since the Argentine financial crisis of 2001-2002, bilateral investment treaties (“BITs”) have increasingly come under the spotlight as a means by which foreign investors can enforce their rights against the host State of their investment. These rights come in the form of various substantive standards of protection, such as the protection against expropriation, the right to fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, national treatment, most-favoured nation treatment, and importantly, the right to bring a claim in international arbitration against the host State in the event that the investor considers that the State has breached its international obligations. This article considers the case of Argentina (which has faced over 40 claims under BITs in the last decade), and provides a concise review of the substantive and procedural protections available to investors under these international instruments. The article then considers some challenges faced by the regime for investment treaty arbitration, such as the problem of inconsistent decisions, multiple proceedings, and the perceived lack of transparency.

Key concepts: Expropriation, Arbitration, Transparency (behavior), Bilateral investment treaty, Treaty, International investment, State (computer science), Business

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Investment Arbitration as the ‘New Frontier' — Research Paper | ScholarLens