- 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
The relationship between international tribunals deriving their existence from bilateral investment and other treaties and domestic courts is one of the most important and also interesting issues of modern investment arbitration. This article addresses the issue of the interaction of contract claims and treaty claims, their classification, and subsequent adjudication and discusses related arbitral decisions and their consequences. It provides an overview of the current state of affairs with regard to the contract claim/treaty claim issue and the problem of the characterization of these claims. This article addresses in detail the issue of umbrella clauses and whether the right to arbitrate under Bilateral Investment Treaties (BIT) can be waived by an investor. It tries to identify the current ‘trend’ in the decision-making of arbitral tribunals and mentions that BITs are worded differently and the circumstances of each case will always be different.
Jacomijn J. van Haersolte-van Hof, Advocaat and Counsel, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Amsterdam.
Anne K. Hoffmann, Rechtsanwaltin (Germany) and Solicitor (England and Wales).
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.