- Table of Cases
- Table of International Treaties and Conventions
- Table of Rules and Resolutions
- Table of Legislation
- List of Contributors
- Policy Issues
- Investment, Investor, Nationality, and Shareholders
- Applicable Law
- Multilateral Investment Rules Revisited
- Interactions Between Investment and Non-investment Obligations
- Trade and Investment
- Admission and Establishment
- Standards of Treatment
- Coverage of Taxation Under Modern Investment Treaties
- Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment
- Emergency Exceptions: State of Necessity and <i>Force Majeure</i>
- Investment Insurance
- State Responsibility and Attribution
- Regulatory Transparency
- Corporate Social Responsibility
- Methods of Dispute Resolution
- Procedural Transparency
- Independence, Impartiality, and Duty of Disclosure of Arbitrators.
- Consent to Arbitration
- Jurisdiction and Admissibility
- The Jurisdictional Threshold of a Prima-Facie Case
- The Relationship between International Tribunals and Domestic Courts
- Parallel Proceedings
- Compensation, Damages, and Valuation
- Review of Awards
- An Appellate System in International Investment Arbitration?
- Compliance and Enforcement
- A Doctrine of Precedent?
- Tribunal's Powers versus Party Autonomy
Abstract and Keywords
This article analyses the relationship between the tribunal's initiative and the arguments made by the parties. It examines to what extent a tribunal may or shall integrate or develop arguments that should have been made by the parties, both in respect of questions of fact and in respect of questions of law. It briefly explains the question of how active the tribunal may be in respect of the arguments made by the parties. This article discusses that the power of the tribunal is ultimately limited by the rules on jurisdiction and any mandatory rules of procedure contained in the applicable international investment treaty and by the criteria for determining the validity and enforceability of an arbitral award. It argues that the tribunal enjoys considerable freedom in respect of the inferences that it draws from the evidence and in respect of the legal consequences of the proven facts. This article concludes by analysing that the tribunal's own inferences and arguments should be communicated to the parties.
Giuditta Cordero Moss, Professor, Institute of Private Law, University of Oslo.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.