Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1613 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (37 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (52 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (92 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (28 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (169 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (24 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (196 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (23 journals)
    - LAW (981 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (11 journals)

INTERNATIONAL LAW (196 journals)                     

Showing 1 - 171 of 171 Journals sorted alphabetically
Acta Juridica Hungarica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of International and Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Agora International Journal of Juridical Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
AJIL Unbound     Open Access  
American Business Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
American Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 72)
American University International Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
Annuaire Français de Droit International     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Annual Review of Law and Social Science     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Antitrust Chronicle - Competition Policy International     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Anuario de Derechos Humanos     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Anuario Español de Derecho Internacional     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Anuario español de derecho internacional privado     Partially Free  
Anuario Iberoamericano de Derecho Internacional Penal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Arbitration International     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
ASA Bulletin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Asian International Arbitration Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Asian Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Asian Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Australasian Policing     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Australian International Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Australian Journal of Asian Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Belli Ac Pacis : Jurnal Hukum Internasional     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Berkeley Journal of International Law     Open Access   (Followers: 25)
Boletin Mexicano de Derecho Comparado     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Borderlands Journal : Culture, Politics, Law and Earth     Open Access  
Boston College International & Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Brigham Young University International Law and Management Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
British Yearbook of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 39)
Brooklyn Journal of International Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
California Western International Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Annuaire canadien de droit international     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Cape Town Convention Journal     Open Access  
Chicago Journal of International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Chinese Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
Columbia Journal of Transnational Law     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Common Law World Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
Commonwealth Law Bulletin     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Comparative Strategy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Computer Law Review International     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Contemporary Security Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
Cornell International Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Corporate Governance An International Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Criterios     Open Access  
Denver Journal of International Law and Policy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Deusto Journal of Human Rights     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
European Business Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
European Company Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
European Foreign Affairs Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 35)
European Journal for Security Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
European Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 251)
European Labour Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 18)
European Political Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 45)
European Property Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Fordham International Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Foreign Policy Bulletin     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Global Jurist     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Global Justice : Theory Practice Rhetoric     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Harvard International Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 52)
ICSID Review : Foreign Investment Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Indian Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal  
Inter: Revista de Direito Internacional e Direitos Humanos da UFRJ     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Intergenerational Justice Review     Open Access  
International & Comparative Law Quarterly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 273)
International Area Studies Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
International Commentary on Evidence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
International Comparative Jurisprudence     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
International Human Rights Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
International Journal for Court Administration     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 32)
International Journal of Discrimination and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
International Journal of Evidence and Proof     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
International Journal of Information Privacy, Security and Integrity     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
International Journal of Language & Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
International Journal of Law in Context     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 67)
International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
International Journal of Nuclear Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
International Journal of Political Economy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
International Journal of Private Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
International Journal of Public Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
International Journal of Refugee Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 39)
International Journal of Transitional Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
International Law: Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
International Planning Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
International Review of Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
International Review of the Red Cross     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
International Security     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 87)
Israel Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Ius Gentium     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 52)
Journal of Biosecurity Biosafety and Biodefense Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of European Competition Law & Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Journal of Genocide Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Journal of International Dispute Settlement     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Journal of International Economic Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35)
Journal of International Political Theory     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
Journal of International Trade Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20)
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Migration and Refugee Issues, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 34)
Journal of Private International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Journal on the Use of Force and International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
Legal Issues of Economic Integration     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Leiden Journal of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 45)
LEX     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
London Review of International Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Loyola University Chicago International Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 27)
Maryland Journal of International Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Melbourne Journal of International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 18)
Michigan State International Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Netherlands International Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Netherlands Yearbook of International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
New Zealand Yearbook of International Law, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Oromia Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Pace International Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Paix et Sécurité Internationales     Open Access  
Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Polar Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Public and Private International Law Bulletin     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Recht der Werkelijkheid     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Review of European Community & International Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Revista de Derecho de la Unión Europea     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Revista de Direito Brasileira     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Revista de la Secretaría del Tribunal Permanente de Revisión     Open Access  
Revista Facultad de Jurisprudencia     Open Access  
Revista Tribuna Internacional     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Revista Videre     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Revue québécoise de droit international / Quebec Journal of International Law / Revista quebequense de derecho internacional     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Santa Clara Journal of International Law     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
SASI     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
South African Yearbook of International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
South Carolina Journal of International Law and Business     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Stanford Journal of International Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
TDM Transnational Dispute Management Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Tilburg Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Transnational Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Uniform Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
University of Miami Inter-American Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Utrecht Journal of International and European Law     Open Access   (Followers: 17)
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law     Free   (Followers: 5)
Virginia Journal of International Law     Free   (Followers: 5)
Washington University Global Studies Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Wisconsin International Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 5)
World Journal of VAT/GST Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
World Trade and Arbitration Materials     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Yale Journal of International Law     Free   (Followers: 18)
Yearbook of International Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Zeitschrift für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Zeitschrift für das Privatrecht der Europäischen Union - European Union Private Law Review / Revue de droit privé de l'Union européenne     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Zeitschrift für Zivilprozess International     Hybrid Journal  

           

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
ICSID Review : Foreign Investment Law Journal
Number of Followers: 13  
 
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 0258-3690 - ISSN (Online) 2049-1999
Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [415 journals]
  • RSM v Saint Lucia:1With Prejudice—The Unlikely Death Knell
    • Authors: Bao C.
      Pages: 44 - 49
      PubDate: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa017
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2021)
       
  • United Utilities (Tallinn) BV v Estonia1ICSID Arbitration after Achmea:
           the Beginning of the End or the End of the Beginning' 
    • Authors: Yusuf G; Tan G.
      Pages: 183 - 196
      PubDate: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa029
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2021)
       
  • Equality of Parties before International Investment Tribunals: The
           Institute of International Law Resolution 2019 
    • Authors: McLachlan C.
      Pages: 419 - 425
      PubDate: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa028
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2021)
       
  • EIGHTEENTH COMMISSION: Equality of Parties before International Investment
           TribunalsInstitute of International Law
    • Pages: 426 - 433
      PubDate: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa052
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2021)
       
  • 8èMe COMMISSION: L’égalité des parties devant les tribunaux
           internationaux d’investissementsInstitut de Droit International
    • Pages: 434 - 441
      PubDate: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa053
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2021)
       
  • The Search for Order within Chaos in the Evolution of ISDS 
    • Authors: Cheng T.
      Pages: 1 - 19
      PubDate: Fri, 01 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa003
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • David R Aven v Costa Rica:1The Confluence of Corporations, Public
           International Law and International Investment Law
    • Authors: Bose D.
      Pages: 20 - 28
      PubDate: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa010
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Mathias Kruck and others v Spain1
    • Authors: De Brabandere E.
      Pages: 29 - 36
      PubDate: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa012
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • B-Mex, LLC and others v United Mexican States:1A Defect in the Notice of
           Intent is not a Bar to Jurisdiction under NAFTA
    • Authors: Legum B; Ludwig M.
      Pages: 37 - 43
      PubDate: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa018
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Republic of Ghana and Bilateral Investment Treaties: A Burgeoning
           Expert' 
    • Authors: Avayiwoe G.
      Pages: 50 - 62
      Abstract: In this note, I categorize and review the bilateral investment treaties (BITs) concluded by the Republic of Ghana. I identify the current status of Ghana in the BIT sphere as being that of neither a novice nor a fully-fledged expert. The country is, nevertheless, progressively exhibiting some level of innovation and negotiation influence. Notwithstanding, all generations of its BITs remain very broad in scope, and, also, share laconic and vaguely-worded provisions. Furthermore, contemporary models of international investment agreements (IIAs) as contained in Ghana’s latest BIT—the earlier generations having lacked such innovations—is not as robust as those in emerging IIAs of Africa. Towards sustainability and systemic coherence of the BITs and the new African IIA paradigm, Ghana, certainly, needs to reform its existing BITs and reorient its future investment treaty practice. In the interim, I propose the Pan-African Investment Code (PAIC) as the benchmark.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa008
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Proliferation of Joint Interpretation Clauses in New International
           Investment Agreements: A Mixed Blessing' 
    • Authors: Marotti L.
      Pages: 63 - 81
      Abstract: Joint interpretation clauses (JICs) are among the most controversial control mechanisms on the interpretative powers of tribunals brought by the current wave of reform of the investor–State dispute settlement system (ISDS). Literally proliferating in the new generation of international investment agreements (IIAs), these clauses give contracting States the power to issue joint interpretations (JIs) that are expressly recognized as binding upon dispute settlement bodies and may even be issued in relation to matters pending before such bodies. This article discusses several issues raised by the ‘authentic interpretation’ enhanced by JICs. In the first part, JICs are assessed against the background of the general rule on treaty interpretation, including, in particular, subsequent agreements under article 31(3)(a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The second part of the article addresses the tensions between judicial bodies and treaty parties sharing the interpretative authority over IIAs and investigates whether there are any limitations on the interpretative powers of States under JICs. The third part is devoted to the impact of JIs on the proper conduct of investment arbitration proceedings, considering the participation of private actors (the investors) in the proceedings and the ‘dual role’ of States (as treaty parties and respondents) in this field. The concluding part of the article speculates whether a greater institutionalization of the international investment regime is likely to prompt more frequent forms of judicial reactions against ‘ill-perceived’ JIs and fuel the tension between States and dispute settlement bodies.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa001
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Investor Obligations for Human Rights 
    • Authors: Choudhury B.
      Pages: 82 - 104
      Abstract: Despite progress being made in the business and human rights field in defining corporate responsibility for human rights, defining foreign investors roles vis-à-vis human rights remains mainly stagnant. The idea that businesses have responsibility for human rights is well ensconced in global norms and is based on society's expectations of business in the 21st century. Yet despite this widespread recognition, international investment law is silent on the matter. This leaves a disconnect between the norms dictating the corporate responsibility for human rights in public international law and those found in international investment law.One way to better align progress in the business and human rights movement with international investment law is to introduce investor obligations for human rights. These obligations can be located both in investment treaties as well as in non-treaty sources. Moreover, investment arbitration provides multiple entrypoints for tribunals to consider such obligations, for example through counterclaims, jurisdictional claims, or admissibility claims, among others.Two primary benefits arise from introducing investor obligations for human rights. First, it can act as vehicle by which business and human rights norms, generally, can be enforced. Second, and more importantly, introducing investor obligations for human rights can help to better contextualize the interpretation of IIAs. Introducing such obligations can be used to remind tribunals that international investment law operates in a system that includes non-investment concerns such as human rights.Considering such obligations, in and of themselves, however, are unlikely to prompt wider changes in international investment law. Nevertheless, including investor obligations in international investment law may prompt tribunals to give more balanced interpretations to international investment agreements. This can work towards ensuring that international investment law serves its ultimate aim of promoting a state’s development.
      PubDate: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa002
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Contributory Fault under International Law: A Gateway for Human Rights in
           ISDS' 
    • Authors: El-Hosseny F; Devine P.
      Pages: 105 - 129
      Abstract: The intersection between foreign investment and human rights is gaining attention, as is evident from an increasing number of investment treaty awards analysing legal issues relating to human rights. In the recent International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration of Bear Creek v Peru, Philippe Sands QC posited, in a dissenting opinion, that the investor’s contribution to events—ie protests against its allegedly adverse environmental impact and disregard of indigenous rights, namely resulting from its ‘inability to obtain a “social licence”’—which led to the unlawful expropriation of its investment, was ‘significant and material’. He further noted that the investor’s ‘responsibilities are no less than those of the government’ and found that damages should thus be reduced. Last year, the Netherlands adopted a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), which allows tribunals to ‘take into account non-compliance by the investor with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ when assessing damages. These recent developments shed light on how states and tribunals, as part of their decision-making process, can take into account human rights in practice, and crucially in respect of damages analyses. By first dissecting the concept of contributory fault, then shedding light on the intersection of investment treaty law and human rights, as elucidated in recent jurisprudence, this article questions whether there now exists a gateway for human rights obligations (soft or hard) in the investment treaty arbitration realm through the concept of contributory fault.
      PubDate: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa005
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Economic Crises and the Fundamental Change of Circumstances in Investment
           Arbitration 
    • Authors: Bayrak O.
      Pages: 130 - 153
      Abstract: —How can host States defend economic emergency measures in investment arbitration' Most States adopt a restrictive interpretation of treaty standards, invoke a NPM clauses or argue Necessity. However, one instrument so far has been overlooked, that is a fundamental change of circumstances. Originating in private law under the rubric of the clausula rebus sic stantibus, the legal principle eventually migrated into public international law where it is today codified in art 62 VCLT. Essentially, the rule operates as a balancing exercise for extra-contractual risks. Due to its history, purpose and structural elements, art 62 VCLT is the right instrument to examine economic emergency measures. Still, host States so far seem reluctant, presumably due to uncertainties regarding applicability and scope. This inquiry demonstrates that such reluctance is unwarranted.
      PubDate: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa007
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Non-Compensable Regulation versus Regulatory Expropriation: Are Climate
           Change Regulations Compensable' 
    • Authors: Khachvani D.
      Pages: 154 - 173
      Abstract: The global threat posed by climate change calls for increased governmental regulation in various fields of economic activity. New regulations, especially in the carbon-intensive industries, will likely interfere with economic interests and acquired rights of foreign investors. One of the main questions that investment treaty tribunals will have to answer in this context is whether, and to what extent, such regulations should be accompanied by compensation.Investment treaty jurisprudence has yet to come up with comprehensive criteria for distinguishing compensable regulatory expropriation from non-compensable exercise of regulatory powers. This uncertainty is particularly evident from recent cases dealing with issues, such as plain packaging for tobacco, nuclear energy phase-out and solar energy tariffs. The absence of specific criteria causes concern among States, investors and other stakeholders, and contributes to the ongoing backlash against the investor–State dispute settlement system.This article suggests drawing the borderline between non-compensable regulation and regulatory expropriation in reference to inherent limits of property rights that underlie foreign investments. Although the State owes compensation to an investor whose property rights are dispossessed by an increased regulation, it is uncontroversial that property rights are themselves limited by the rights of others. The precise limits change over time, in light of new circumstances and available scientific evidence. Prudent investors, especially those active in hazardous industries, assume the risk of such changes as part of their business risk. A regulation that does no more than to clarify the inherent limits of the investor’s rights in light of newly emerging circumstances does not constitute an interference with such rights and does not therefore qualify as expropriation. Under this approach, bona fide regulations that aim to tackle the emerging threats posed by climate change do not engender a right to compensation.
      PubDate: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa009
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • China’s International Investment Strategy: Bilateral, Regional, and
           Global Law and Policy, Edited by Julien Chaisse
    • Authors: Qi T.
      Pages: 174 - 178
      Abstract: China’s International Investment Strategy: Bilateral, Regional, and Global Law and Policy, Edited by ChaisseJulien (Oxford University Press2019) ISBN 9780198827450, US $135.
      PubDate: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa004
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Return of the Home State to Investor–State Disputes. Bringing Back
           Diplomatic Protection', by Rodrigo Polanco
    • Authors: Arp B.
      Pages: 179 - 182
      Abstract: The Return of the Home State to Investor–State Disputes. Bringing Back Diplomatic Protection', by PolancoRodrigo (Cambridge University Press2019) ISBN 9781108628983, US $130.
      PubDate: Thu, 21 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa006
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • UP and CD Holding Internationale v Hungary:1 Achmea is Not the End of
           Intra-EU ICSID Arbitration
    • Authors: Hodgson M; Rivera E.
      Pages: 197 - 205
      PubDate: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa019
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Besserglik v Mozambique: A Lesson in Returning to the Basics1
    • Authors: Laird I; Gashaw R.
      Pages: 206 - 213
      PubDate: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa022
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • First Impressions of a Virtual Hearing at ICSID 
    • Authors: Brown C; McNeill M, Sharpe J.
      Pages: 214 - 222
      PubDate: Thu, 08 Oct 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa030
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Amicus Curiae Participation in ISDS: A Caution Against Political
           Intervention in Treaty Interpretation
    • Authors: Yu C.
      Pages: 223 - 235
      Abstract: The reform of the investor–State dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism has sparked intense debate among commentators. The proliferation of ISDS cases means that the mechanism can exert increasing influence on international and domestic laws, which creates higher expectations (and thus more critiques) of the independence, fairness, coherence and transparency of arbitral decision making.22 For States, however, there seems to exist competing motivations for reform: on one hand, they seem to envisage that certain measures to judicialize ISDS are desirable (for example, establishing appellate tribunals and increasing transparency and public participation in ISDS proceedings); on the other hand, meanwhile, States are seeking to reinforce their control over treaty interpretation—a core part of judicial law making—through subsequent agreements and subsequent practice. This phenomenon is particularly embodied in two proposed (or adopted) institutional arrangements: the binding interpretative notes of treaty committees and the prioritized treatment of non-disputing treaty parties’ amicus curiae submissions on issues of treaty interpretation. The former arrangement obligates investment tribunals to follow the interpretative opinions issued by treaty parties (even if they are issued after the dispute arises),33 and the latter, as will be detailed below, obligates tribunals to consider non-disputing treaty parties’ opinions on treaty interpretation. These measures may give rise to serious legitimacy problems and create a potential conflict between rule by judges as against rule by States. The dilemma that States are faced with in choosing between judicialization and politicization should not be surprising: they are both the legislator and the respondent parties in ISDS, which gives rise to competing demands for a rule-based system vis-à-vis ample space for political control.44
      PubDate: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa025
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Fight between Interpretation and Modification: A Critique of Sanum v
           Laos 
    • Authors: Wang Y.
      Pages: 236 - 252
      PubDate: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa024
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Enforceability of Proposed Reforms to Investor–State Dispute
           Settlement 
    • Authors: Qayyum Z.
      Pages: 253 - 278
      PubDate: Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa016
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Role of Amici Curiae in Light of Recent Developments in Investment
           Treaty Arbitration: Legitimizing the System'
    • Authors: Baltag C.
      Pages: 279 - 310
      Abstract: AbstarctRecent developments in investment arbitration and international investment law, in general, are prompting the review of the role of amici curiae in investment arbitration proceedings. The latest initiatives addressing the challenges to the investor-State dispute settlement (‘ISDS’) system, including under the auspices of the UNCITRAL Working Group III, alluded to the participation of the amici in ISDS proceedings. The new generation of international investment agreements (‘IIAs’) is also tackling an enhanced role of amicus curiae, whereas the proposal for the amendment of the ICSID Arbitration Rules includes sizeable amendments to Rule 37(2), to reflect these developments and other concerns raised so far in the practice. This paper addresses the role of amici curiae in these turbulent times for ISDS, emphasizing that, before anything, the role of these non-disputing parties is to assist arbitral tribunals.
      PubDate: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa021
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Understanding ICSID Article 54 
    • Authors: Bermann G.
      Pages: 311 - 344
      Abstract: To the surprise of many, questions have recently arisen over the scope of inquiry, if any, that a national court may, consistent with Article 54 of the ICSID Convention, make in connection with the enforcement of an ICSID award. It has long been assumed in many, if not most, quarters that a national court is privileged to condition enforcement of an ICSID Convention award on a single simple requirement, viz. that the award be certified by the Secretary-General of ICSID. Until recently, doubts over whether that is so have been raised in a very small number of jurisdictions. But the Commission of the European Union has taken the view that an ICSID Convention award may be denied enforcement if it is contrary to a principle of “autonomy” of EU law and, based on its judgment in Achmea case in connection with non-ICSID awards, the European Court of Justice most likely takes the same view. This suggests that the European Union regards violation of EU public policy, more generally, as a defense to enforcement of an ICSID award. Based on text, object and purpose, legislative history, and predominant state practice, this position appears to run seriously afoul of the ICSID Convention. At the same time, some meaning must be given to the language in Article 54 according to which an ICSID award must be enforced by a national court “as if it were a final judgment of a court” of the enforcing State. The author finds that the understanding of Article 54 that best reflects all pertinent considerations is that it imposes on courts the modest requirement that they subject the enforcement of ICSID awards to no more restrictive or onerous procedures than they impose on the enforecement of national judgments.
      PubDate: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa020
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Trump Administration’s Impact on US Investment Policy 
    • Authors: Mandell L.
      Pages: 345 - 368
      Abstract: This article reviews the Trump Administration’s impact on US investment policy – meaning, US policy regarding the promotion and protection of US investment abroad – at the close of the Administration. In short, the Administration’s impact on US investment policy was substantial by any measure. It withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was effectively the largest investment agreement ever negotiated, and it also renegotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement and replaced it with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which features a novel approach to investor-state dispute settlement. The Administration’s impact on US investment policy was also shaped by steps it chose not to take, including its decision not to replicate its approach in the USMCA in its amendments to the Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement, re-start the United States-China Bilateral Investment Treaty or Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations or re-visit dozens of US investment agreements that are currently in force. This article reviews these decisions with a view to considering the challenges and opportunities that await future US policymakers in the executive and legislative branches with respect to US investment policy.
      PubDate: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa023
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • The Status of the Testimony of the Non-Appearing Witness in International
           Arbitration 
    • Authors: Brown C; Still P.
      Pages: 369 - 397
      Abstract: A problem that arises from time to time in international arbitration proceedings is how an arbitral tribunal is to deal with the evidence of a non-appearing witness. The applicable rules of arbitration typically confirm that the tribunal has the authority to determine (e.g.) the “admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of the evidence offered,” but they rarely go any further than this. The purpose of this article is to seek to provide guidance to tribunals by reviewing the available arbitral practice. This reveals that there are circumstances in which tribunals have adopted broadly consistent approaches to the status of the non-appearing witness's written testimony (although this does not appear to extend to the treatment of a non-appearing expert's evidence), and that tribunals have generally not distinguished between the existence of a valid reason for a witness's failure to appear, or of exceptional circumstances which would warrant the witness's evidence being admitted. In addition, tribunals appear to be reluctant to place much weight on a non-appearing witness's written evidence unless it is corroborated by the testimony of other witnesses or documentary evidence, and they are also reluctant to draw adverse inferences from a witness's non-appearance.
      PubDate: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa026
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Christina L Beharry (ed), Contemporary and Emerging Issues on the Law of
           Damages and Valuation in International Investment Arbitration
    • Authors: Diaz L; Quinn N.
      Pages: 398 - 405
      Abstract: BeharryChristina L (ed), Contemporary and Emerging Issues on the Law of Damages and Valuation in International Investment Arbitration(Brill Nijhoff2018) ISBN 978-90-04-35779-2, US $186
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa015
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • International Mediation
    • Authors: Dunna G.
      Pages: 406 - 414
      Abstract: TitiCatharine and GómezKatia Fach, Mediation in International Commercial and Investment Disputes (Oxford University Press2019), ISBN 9780198827955, US $115
      PubDate: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa013
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
  • Metka Potočnik, Arbitrating Brands: International Investment Treaties
           and Trade Marks
    • Authors: Živković P.
      Pages: 415 - 418
      Abstract: PotočnikMetka, Arbitrating Brands: International Investment Treaties and Trade Marks (Elgar International Investment Law2019), ISBN: 978 1 78897 180 5 (print copy available from Elgar Publishing, £90.00; ebook version available from various ebook vendors, £22)
      PubDate: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa014
      Issue No: Vol. 35, No. 1-2 (2020)
       
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
 


Your IP address: 3.236.122.9
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-