Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-9g8ph Total loading time: 0.425 Render date: 2022-06-30T23:58:18.242Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

12 - 1917 and Its Implications for the Law of Expropriation

from Part IV - Investment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2021

Kathryn Greenman
Affiliation:
University of Technology, Sydney
Anne Orford
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Anna Saunders
Affiliation:
Harvard Law School, Massachusetts
Ntina Tzouvala
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Get access

Summary

In this chapter I examine three specific legal interventions which flowed from the revolutionary events of 1917 in relation to the law of expropriation. These legal interventions, and the doctrines and principles that they engendered, still hold significance in investor-state arbitration as they are systematically referred to in legal reasoning presented by counsel and continue to shape and influence the decisions of international arbitration tribunals. In light of the analysis carried out in this chapter, it is possible to articulate two main arguments. The first argument relates to the claim, often put forward by international investment law proponents,1 that international investment law and investment treaty arbitration are crucial to the depoliticisation of disputes between investors and host states. According to this view, the international investment law system is capable of ‘avoiding espousal of investors’ interests by their home states’, mainly by directly excluding recourse to diplomatic protection to solve conflicts arising between host states and foreign investors.2 Depoliticisation, within this view, is understood as the transfer of such conflicts ‘from the political arena of diplomatic protection to a judicial forum with objective, previously agreed standards and a pre-formulated dispute settlement process’.3 This view also acknowledges, however, that the disputes decided upon by international investment tribunals indeed remain political in nature for both host and home states.

Type
Chapter
Information
Revolutions in International Law
The Legacies of 1917
, pp. 291 - 314
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×