Aalto, P, ‘The New International Energy Charter: Instrumental or Incremental Progress of Governance?’ (2016) 11 Energy Research and Social Science 92Google Scholar

Abdelal, R and Meunier, S, ‘Managed Globalisation: Doctrine, Practice and Promise’ (2010) 17 Journal of European Public Policy 350Google Scholar

Akhtar, SI and Weiss, AW, ‘U.S. International Investment Agreements: Issues for Congress’ (2013) Congressional Research ServiceGoogle Scholar

Ali, AH and others, The International Arbitration Rulebook: A Guide to Arbitral Regimes (Kluwer 2019)Google Scholar

Alschner, W, Investment Arbitration and State-Driven Reform (OUP 2022)Google Scholar

Alter, KJ, ‘The European Court’s Political Power’ (1996) 19 West European Politics 458Google Scholar

Alter, KJ, Establishing the Supremacy of European Law: The Making of an International Rule of Law in Europe (OUP 2001)Google Scholar

Alvarez, JE, ‘The Return of the State’ (2011) 20 Minnesota Journal of International Law 223Google Scholar

Alvarez, JE and Khamsi, K, ‘The Argentine Crisis and Foreign Investors: A Glimpse into the Heart of the Investment Regime’ in Sauvant, Karl P (ed), The Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy 2008/2009 (OUP 2009)Google Scholar

Angelet, N, ‘CETA and the Debate on the Reform of the Investment Regime’ in Mbengue, MM and Schacherer, S (eds), Foreign Investment Under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

Ankersmit, L, ‘Achmea: The Beginning of the End for ISDS in and with Europe?’ (Investment Treaty News, 24 April 2018) <https://www.iisd.org/itn/2018/04/24/achmea-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-isds-in-and-with-europe-laurens-ankersmit/#_edn11>>Google Scholar

Arato, J, ‘The Logic of Contract in the World of Investment Treaties’ (2016) 58 William & Mary Law Review 351Google Scholar

Arato, J and others, ‘Reforming Shareholders Claims in ISDS’ Academic Forum on ISDS Concept Paper 2019/9, Version 2 (17 September 2019) <https://www.jus.uio.no/pluricourts/english/projects/leginvest/academic-forum/papers/papers/arato-reforming-shareholder-claims-isds-af-9-2019.pdf>>Google Scholar

Araujo, BAM, The EU Deep Trade Agenda (OUP 2016)Google Scholar

Baltag, C (ed), ICSID Convention after 50 Years: Unsettled Issues (Kluwer 2017)Google Scholar

Baltag, C‘The ICSID Convention: A Successful Story – The Origins and History of the ICSID’ in Baltag, C (ed), ICSID Convention after 50 Years: Unsettled Issues (Kluwer 2017)Google Scholar

Barbiere, C, ‘France and Germany to Form United Front against ISDS’ (Euractiv, 15 January 2015) <https://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/news/france-and-germany-to-form-united-front-against-isds/>>Google Scholar

Barbiere, C, ‘Mathias Fekl: The EU Should Have Its Own Arbitration Court’ (Euractiv, 3 June 2015) <https://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/interview/matthias-fekl-the-eu-should-have-its-own-arbitration-court/>>Google Scholar

Barents, R, ‘The Internal Market Unlimited: Some Observations on the Legal Basis of EU Legislation’ (1993) 30 Common Market Law Review 85Google Scholar

Barnard, C, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (6th edn, OUP 2019)Google Scholar

Barragan, DG, Mitretodis, A and Tuck, A, ‘The New NAFTA: Scaled-Back Arbitration in the USMCA’ (2019) 6 Journal of International Arbitration 739Google Scholar

Basedow, R, ‘The EU’s International Investment Policy Ten Years On: The Policy-Making Implications of Unintended Competence Transfers’ (2021) 59(3) Journal of Common Market Studies 643Google Scholar

Bauer, M, ‘Campaign-Triggered Mass Collaboration in the EU’s Online Consultations: The ISDS-in-TTIP Case’ (2015) 14 European View 121Google Scholar

Bellak, C, ‘Economic Impact of Investment Agreements’ (2015) Vienna University Department of Economics Working Paper Series 200 <https://epub.wu.ac.at/4625/1/wp200.pdf>>Google Scholar

Bermann, GA, ‘The Prospects of Eco Swiss v Benetton for International Commercial Arbitration: A Comment on Eco Swiss v Benetton’ in Wautelet, P and others (eds), The Practice of Arbitration: Essays in Honour of Hans van Houtte (Hart 2012)Google Scholar

Beunder, A and Mast, J, ‘As the World Meets to Discuss ISDS, Many Fear Meaningless Reforms’ (Transnational Institute, 4 April 2019) <https://longreads.tni.org/isds-many-fear-meaningless-reforms/>>Google Scholar

Bischoff, JA and Wühler, M, ‘The Notion of Investment’ in Mbengue, MM and Schacherer, S (eds), Foreign Investment Under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

Bjorklund, A, ‘Investment Treaty Arbitral Decisions as Jurisprudence Constante’ (2008) UC Davis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 158Google Scholar

Bodansky, D, ‘Legitimacy in International Law and International Relations’ (2011) APSA 2011 Annual Meeting Paper, 11–12 <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1900289>>Google Scholar

Bodansky, D, ‘Legitimacy in International Law and International Relations’ in Dunoff, J and Pollack, MA (eds), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (CUP 2013)Google Scholar

Bonnitcha, J, Substantive Protection under Investment Treaties: A Legal and Economic Analysis (CUP 2014)Google Scholar

Bradford, A, The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World (OUP 2020)Google Scholar

Bremmer, I, ‘The New Rules of Globalization’ (2014) 92 Harvard Business Review 103Google Scholar

Broberg, M and Fenger, N, Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice (OUP 2010)Google Scholar

Bromund, TR, Roberts, JM and Dasgupta, R, ‘The U.S. Should Reject the European Commission’s Proposed Investment Court’ (The Heritage Foundation, 13 November 2015) 4485 <https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/the-us-should-reject-the-european-commissions-proposed-investment-court>>Google Scholar

Brower, CN and Schill, SW, ‘Is Arbitration a Threat or a Boon to the Legitimacy of International Investment Law’ (2009) 9 Chicago Journal of International Law 471Google Scholar

Brown, CM, ‘Changes in the Common Commercial Policy of the European Union after the Entry into Force of the Treaty of Lisbon: A Practitioner’s Perspective’ in Bungenberg, M and Herrmann, C (eds), Common Commercial Policy after Lisbon (Springer 2013)Google Scholar

Bungenberg, B, ‘A History of Investment Arbitration and Investor-State Dispute Settlement in Germany’ (2016) Centre for International Governance Innovation, Investor-State Arbitration Series Paper No. 12Google Scholar

Burley, AM and Mattli, W, ‘Europe before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration’ in Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M (ed), Debates on European Integration (Palgrave 2006)Google Scholar

Bush, G, 41st President of the USA, ‘Address before a Joint Session of the Congress of the State of the Union’ (Washington, DC, 29 January 1991) <https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-1>>Google Scholar

Calamita, NJ, ‘The Principle of Proportionality and the Problem of Indeterminacy in International Investment Treaties’ in Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy 2013–2014 (OUP 2014) 157–200Google Scholar

Campbell, TD, The Legal Theory of Ethical Positivism (Routledge 1996)Google Scholar

Caplan, LM and Sharpe, JK, ‘United States’ in Brown, Chester (ed), Commentaries on Selected Model Investment Treaties (OUP 2013)Google Scholar

Chaisse, J (ed), China–European Union Investment Relationships: Towards a New Leadership in Global Investment Governance? (Edward Elgar 2018)Google Scholar

Chaisse, J and Renouf, Y, ‘Investor–State Dispute Settlement’ in Drake-Brockman, J and Messerlin, P (eds), Potential Benefits of an Australia–EU Free Trade Agreement: Key Issues and Options (Adelaide University Press 2018)Google Scholar

Chalmers, D, Davies, G and Monti, G, European Union Law (2nd edn, CUP 2010)Google Scholar

Chase, P, ‘TTIP, Investor–State Dispute Settlement and the Rule of Law’ (2015) 14 European View 217Google Scholar

Chase, P and Heather, S, ‘Investment Protection: If It Isn’t Broken, Why “Fix” It?’ (US Chamber of Commerce, 1 October 2015) <https://www.uschamber.com/issue-brief/investment-protection-if-it-ain-t-broke-why-fix-it>>Google Scholar

Chen, H, ‘China’s Innovative ISDS Mechanisms and Their Implications’ (2018) 112 American Journal of International Law 207Google Scholar

Claes, M, ‘The Validity and Primacy of EU Law and the “Cooperative Relationship” between National Constitutional Courts and the Court of the Justice of the European Union’ (2016) 23 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 151Google Scholar

Cohen, A, ‘Constitutionalism without Constitution: Transnational Elites between Political Mobilisation and Legal Expertise in the Making of a Constitution for Europe (1940s–1960s)’ (2007) 32 Law and Social Inquiry 109Google Scholar

Cohen, A, ‘The European Court of Justice in the Emergent European Filed of Power: Transnational Judicial Institutions and National Career Paths’ in Dezaley, Y and Garth, B (eds), Lawyers and the Construction of Transnational Justice (Routledge 2012)Google Scholar

Cohen, HG and others, ‘Legitimacy and International Courts – A Framework’ in Grossman, N and others (eds), Legitimacy and International Courts (CUP 2018)Google Scholar

Collins, S, ‘Moldova v Komstroy: A Moment of Reckoning for Intra-EU Investment Arbitration under The ECT? Considering Its impact on Tribunals, Investors and EU Member States’ (EFILA Blog, November 2021)Google Scholar

Commission, JP, ‘Precedent in Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Citation Analysis of a Developing Jurisprudence’ (2007) 24 Journal of International Arbitration 129Google Scholar

Costa, JAF, ‘Comparing WTO Panelists and ICSID Arbitrators: The Creation of International Legal Fields’ (2011) 4 Oñati Socio-Legal Series 1Google Scholar

Côté, C, ‘Is Chilling Out There? International Investment Agreements and Government Regulatory Autonomy’ (2016) 16 Academy of International Business Insights 14Google Scholar

Craig, P and De Búrca, G, EU Law, Text, Cases and Materials (6th edn, OUP 2015)Google Scholar

Crema, L, ‘Testing Amici Curiae in International Law: Rules and Practice’ (2012) 22 The Italian Yearbook of International Law 91Google Scholar

Cremona, M, ‘Disconnection Clauses in EU Law and Practice’ in Hillion, C and Koutrakos, P, Mixed Agreements Revisited, The EU and its Member States in the World (Hart 2010)Google Scholar

Crépet Daigremont, C, ‘Most Favoured Nation Treatment’ in Mbengue, MM and Schacherer, S (eds), Foreign Investment under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

Cullen, H and Charlesworth, H, ‘Diplomacy by Other Means: The Use of Legal Basis Litigation as a Political Strategy by the European Parliament and Member States’ (1999) 36 Common Market Law Review 1243Google Scholar

D’Argent, P, ‘Sources and the Legality and Validity of International Law: What Makes Law “International”?’ in Besson, Samantha and d’Aspremont, Jean, The Oxford Handbook on the Sources of International Law (OUP 2017)Google Scholar

Dahl, RA, ‘Can International Organisations Be Democratic? A Sceptic’s View’ in Shapiro, I and Hacker-Cordon, C (eds), Democracy’s Edges (CUP 2009)Google Scholar

Dai, AC, ‘The International Investment Agreement Network under the “Belt and Road” Initiative’ in Chaisse, J and Gorski, J (eds), The Belt and Road Initiative: Law, Economics and Politics (Brill 2018)Google Scholar

Damjanovic, I, ‘Investment and EU International Agreements’ in Groussot, X and others (eds), The EU Law of Investment: Past, Present and Future (Hart 2023)Google Scholar

Damjanovic, I and de Sadeleer, N, ‘I Would Rather Be a Respondent State before a Domestic Court in the EU than before an International Investment Tribunal’ (2019) 4 European Papers 19Google Scholar

Damjanovic, I and de Sadeleer, N, ‘Values and Objectives of the EU in Light of Opinion 1/17: “Trade for All”, above All’ (2020) 4(1) Europe and the World: A Law Review [25]Google Scholar

Damjanovic, I and Quirico, O, ‘Intra-EU Investment Dispute Settlement in Light of Vattenfall and Achmea: A Matter of Priority’ (2019) 26 Columbia Journal of European Law 102Google Scholar

Dammann, J and Hansmann, H, ‘Globalising Commercial Litigation’ (2008) 94 Cornell Law Review 1Google Scholar

De Búrca, G, ‘The Principle of Proportionality and Its Application in EC Law’ (1993) Yearbook on European Law 125Google Scholar

Decleve, Q, ‘Achmea: Consequences on Applicable Law and ISDS Clauses in Extra-EU BITs and Future EU Trade and Investment Agreements’ (2019) 4 European Papers 99Google Scholar

De Nanteuil, A, ‘Expropriation’ in Mbengue, Makane Moïse and Schacherer, Stefanie (eds), Foreign Investment under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

De Sadeleer, N, EU Environmental Law and the Internal Market (OUP 2014)Google Scholar

De Sadeleer, N, ‘The End of the Game: The Autonomy of the EU Legal Order Opposes Arbitral Tribunals under Bilateral Investment Treaties Concluded between Two Member States’ (2018) 9 European Journal of Risk Regulation 355Google Scholar

De Souza Fleury, PP, ‘Umbrella Clauses: A Trend towards Its Elimination’ (2015) 31 Arbitration International 679Google Scholar

De Witte, B, ‘Direct Effect, Primacy and the Nature of the Legal Order’ in Craig, P and de Búrca, G, The Evolution of EU Law (2nd edn, OUP 2011)Google Scholar

De Witte, B, ‘Variable Geometry and Differentiation as Structural Features of the EU Legal Order’ in de Witte, B, Ott, A and Vos, E (eds), Between Flexibility and Disintegration: The Trajectory of Differentiation in EU Law (Edward Elgar 2017)Google Scholar

Dezalay, Y and Garth, BG, Dealing in Virtue (University of Chicago Press 1996)Google Scholar

Dikova, D and others, ‘Immediate Responses to Financial Crises: A Focus on U.S. MNE Subsidiaries’ (2013) 22 International Business Review 202Google Scholar

DiMascio, N and Pauwelyn, J, ‘Nondiscrimination in Trade and Investment Treaties: Worlds Apart or Two Sides of the Same Coin?’ (2008) 102 The American Journal of International Law 48Google Scholar

Dimopoulos, A, EU Foreign Investment Law (OUP 2011)Google Scholar

Di Pietro, D, ‘Applicable Law under Article 42 of the ICSID Convention’ (Transnational Notes, 19 November 2011) <https://blogs.law.nyu.edu/transnational/2011/10/applicable-law-under-article-42-of-the-icsid-convention/>>Google Scholar

Dolzer, R and Yun-I, K, ‘Germany’ in Brown, C (ed), Commentaries on Selected Model Investment Treaties (OUP 2013)Google Scholar

Douglas, Z, ‘Nothing If Not Critical for Investment Treaty Arbitration: Occidental, Eureko and Methanex’ (2006) 22 Arbitration International 27Google Scholar

Drieghe, L, Orbie, J, Potjomkina, D and Shahin, J, ‘Participation of Civil Society in EU Trade Policy Making: How Inclusive Is Inclusion’ (2021) 27(4) New Political Economy 581Google Scholar

Dumberry, P, ‘Fair and Equitable Treatment’ in Mbengue, MM and Schacherer, S (eds), Foreign Investment under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

Eeckhout, P, External Relations of the European Union, Legal and Constitutional Foundations (OUP 2004)Google Scholar

Elsing, SH and Townsend, JM, ‘Bridging the Common Law Civil Law Divide in Arbitration’ (2002) 18 Arbitration International 1Google Scholar

Fanou, M, ‘The CETA ICS and the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order in Opinion 1/17 – A Compass for the Future’ (2020) 22 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 106Google Scholar

Fauchald, OK, ‘The Legal Reasoning of ICSID Tribunals – An Empirical Analysis’ (2008) 19 European Journal of International Law 301Google Scholar

Fiezzoni, SK, ‘The Challenge of UNASUR Member Countries to Replace ICSID Arbitration’ (2011) 2 Beijing Law Review 134Google Scholar

Franck, SD, ‘The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions’ (2005) 73 Fordham Law Review 1521Google Scholar

Franck, SD and Wylie, LE, ‘Predicting Outcomes in Investment Treaty Arbitration’ (2015) 65 Duke Law Journal 459Google Scholar

Franck, TM, The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (OUP 1990)Google Scholar

Frantescu, D, ‘How Will EU Parliamentarians Vote on TTIP?’ (VoteWatch Europe, 9 June 2015) <https://www.votewatch.eu/blog/what-will-eu-parliamentarians-vote-on-ttip/>>Google Scholar

Fukuyama, F, ‘The End of History?’ (1989) 16 The National Interest 3Google Scholar

Fuller, LL, The Morality of Law (Yale University Press 1969)Google Scholar

Gaillard, E and Penushliski, IM, ‘State Compliance with Investment Awards’ (2020) 35(3) ICSID Review 540Google Scholar

Galanter, M, ‘Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Social Change’ (1974) 9 Law and Society Review 95Google Scholar

Gaukrodger, D, ‘Investment Treaties as Corporate Law: Shareholder Claims and Issues of Consistency’ (OECD 2013)Google Scholar

Gaukrodger, D, ‘The Legal Framework Applicable to Joint Interpretative Agreements of Investment Treaties’ (OECD 2016)Google Scholar

Gaukrodger, D and Gordon, K, ‘Investor–State Dispute Settlement: A Scoping Paper for the Investment Policy Community’ (OECD 2012)Google Scholar

Ghouri, AA, ‘Resolving Incompatibilities of Bilateral Investment Treaties of the EU Member States with the EC Treaty: Individual and Collective Options’ (2010) 16 European Law Journal 806Google Scholar

Ginsburg, T, ‘The Culture of Arbitration’ (2003) 36 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1335Google Scholar

Grossman, N, ‘Legitimacy and International Adjudicative Bodies’ (2009) 14 The George Washington International Law Review 107Google Scholar

Groussot, X, General Principles of Community Law (Europa Law Publishing 2006)Google Scholar

Gustafson, D, Jimenez, E and Linn, JF, ‘Developing the Private Sector: A Challenge for the World Bank Group’ (World Bank Group 1989)Google Scholar

Guthrie, BK, ‘Beyond Investment Protection: An Examination of the Potential Influence of Investment Treaties on Domestic Rule of Law’ (2013) 45 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 1151Google Scholar

Guzman, AT, ‘Why LDCs Sign Treaties That Hurt Them: Explaining the Popularity of Bilateral Investment Treaties’ (1998) 38 Virginia Journal of International Law 639Google Scholar

Haight, GW, ‘International Organisations O.E.C.D. Resolution on the Protection of Foreign Property’ (1968) 2 The International Lawyer 326Google Scholar

Haltern, U, ‘Integration through Law’ in Wiener, A and Diez, T (eds), European Integration Theory (OUP 2005)Google Scholar

Hancher, L and Larouche, P, ‘The Coming of Age of EU Regulation of Network Industries and Services of General Economic Interest’ in Craig, P and de Búrca, G (eds), The Evolution of EU Law (2nd edn, OUP 2011)Google Scholar

Hayek, F, The Road to Serfdom (first published 1944, University of Chicago Press 1994)Google Scholar

Heiskanen, V, ‘Forbidding dépeҫage: Law Governing Investment Treaty Arbitration’ (2009) 32 Suffolk Transnational Law Review 367Google Scholar

Henckels, C, ‘Balancing Investment Protection and the Public Interest: The Role of the Standard of Review and the Importance of Deference in Investor–State Arbitration’ (2013) 4 Journal of International Dispute Settlement 197Google Scholar

Hindelang, S, The Free Movement of Capital and Foreign Direct Investment (OUP 2009)Google Scholar

Hindelang, S, ‘Conceptualisation and Application of the Principle of Autonomy of EU Law – The CJEU’s Judgement in Achmea Put in Perspective’ (2019) 44 European Law Review 6Google Scholar

Hoffman, HCH, ‘Article 47’ in Peers, S and others (eds), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary (Hart 2014)Google Scholar

Houde, MF and Yannaca-Small, K, ‘Relationships between International Investment Agreements’ (OECD 2004)Google Scholar

Howarth, R, ‘Lex Mercatoria: Can General Principles of Law Govern International Commercial Contracts?’ (2004) 10 Canterbury Law Review 36Google Scholar

Humphreys, S, Theatre of the Rule of Law: Transnational Legal Intervention in Theory and Practice (CUP 2010)Google Scholar

Juergen, M, ‘German Association of Judges on the TTIP Proposal of the European Commission’ (Global Arbitration News, 21 March 2016) <https://globalarbitrationnews.com/german-association-judges-proposal-european-commission-introduction-investment-court-system-settle-investor-state-disputes-transatlantic-trade-investmen/>>Google Scholar

Kaufmann-Kohler, G, ‘Arbitral Precedent: Dream, Necessity or Excuse?’ (2007) 23 Arbitration International 357Google Scholar

Kaufmann-Kohler, G and Potestà, M, ‘Can the Mauritius Convention Serve as a Model for the Reform of Investor–State Arbitration in Connection with the Introduction of a Permanent Investment Tribunal or an Appeal Mechanism? – Analysis and Roadmap’ (3 June 2016) CIDS-Geneva Center for International Dispute SettlementGoogle Scholar

Kaufmann-Kohler, G and Potestà, M, ‘The Composition of a Multilateral Investment Court and of an Appeal Mechanism for Investment Awards’ (15 November 2017) CIDS Supplemental ReportGoogle Scholar

Kelemen, RD, ‘The Court of Justice of the European Union in the Twenty First Century’ (2016) 79 Law and Contemporary Problems 117Google Scholar

Kennedy, DW, ‘Some Caution about Property Rights as a Recipe for Economic Development’ (2011) 1 Accounting Economics and Law 1Google Scholar

Keohane, RO, ‘Global Governance and Legitimacy’ (2011) 18 Review of International Political Economy 99Google Scholar

Kidane, VL, The Culture of International Arbitration (OUP 2017)Google Scholar

Kinkartz, S, ‘German Social Democrats Fear Free Trade’ (Deutsche Welle, 23 February 2015) <https://www.dw.com/en/german-social-democrats-fear-free-trade/a-18275595>>Google Scholar

Kirchner, S and Geler-Noch, K, ‘Compensation under the European Convention on Human Rights for Expropriations Enforced Prior to the Applicability of the Convention’ (2012) 19 Jurisprudence 21Google Scholar

Kjos, HE, Applicable Law in Investor–State Arbitration: The Interplay between National and International Law (OUP 2013)Google Scholar

Kleinheisterkamp, J, ‘The Next 10 Year ECT Investment Arbitration: A Vision for the Future – From a European Law Perspective’ (Report for the SCC/ECT/ICSID Conference on ‘10 Years of Energy Charter Treaty Arbitration’, 9–10 June 2011) <https://sccinstitute.com/media/61991/jan_kleinheisterkamp_report-ect-eu-law.pdf>>Google Scholar

Kleinheisterkamp, J, ‘Investment Protection and EU Law: The Intra- and Extra-EU Dimension of the Energy Charter Treaty’ (2012) 15 Journal of International Economic Law 85Google Scholar

Kleinheisterkamp, J, ‘Investment Treaty Law and the Fear for Sovereignty: Transnational Challenges and Solutions’ (2015) 78 The Modern Law Review 793Google Scholar

Kline, JM and Ludema, RD, ‘Building a Multilateral Framework for Investment: Comparing the Development of Trade and Investment Accords’ (1997) 6 Transnational Corporations 1Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, M, The Politics of International Law (Hart 2011)Google Scholar

Koutrakos, P, ‘Legal Basis and Delimitation of Competence in EU External Relations’ in Cremona, Marise (ed), EU Foreign Relations Law (Hart 2008)Google Scholar

Krajewski, M, ‘New Functions and New Powers for the European Parliament: Assessing the Changes of the Common Commercial Policy from the Perspective of Democratic Legitimacy’ in Bungenberg, M and Herrmann, C (eds), Common Commercial Policy after Lisbon (Springer 2013)Google Scholar

Kramer, MH, Objectivity and the Rule of Law (CUP 2007)Google Scholar

Kriebaum, U, ‘Regulatory Takings: Balancing the Interests of the Investor and the State’ (2007) 8 The Journal of World Investment and Trade 717Google Scholar

Kriebaum, U, ‘FET and Expropriation in the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement between the European Union and Canada (CETA)’ TDM 1 (2016) <www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=2320>>Google Scholar

Kurtz, J, ‘A General Investment Agreement in the WTO? Lessons from Chapter 11 of NAFTA and the OECD Multilateral Agreement on Investment’ (2002) 23 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Economic Law 713Google Scholar

Langford, M, Behn, D and Lie, RH, ‘The Revolving Door in International Investment Arbitration’ (2017) 20 Journal of International Economic Law 301Google Scholar

Leblond, P and Viju-Miljusevic, C, ‘EU Trade Policy in the Twenty-First Century: Change, Continuity and Challenges’ (2019) 26 Journal of European Public Policy 1836Google Scholar

Lenaerts, K, ‘How the ECJ Thinks: A Study on Judicial Legitimacy’ (2013) 36 Fordham International Law Journal 1302Google Scholar

Lenaerts, K, ‘Modernising Trade Whilst Safeguarding the EU Constitutional Framework: An Insight into the Balanced Approach of Opinion 1/17’ (Seminar on Opinion 1/17, Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 6 September 2019)Google Scholar

Levashova, Y, The Right of States to Regulate in International Investment Law (Kluwer 2019)Google Scholar

Lewis, DJ and Moise, D, ‘One Belt One Road (“OBOR”) Roadmaps: The Legal and Policy Frameworks’ in Chaisse, J and Gorski, J (eds), The Belt and Road Initiative: Law, Economics and Politics (Brill 2018)Google Scholar

Mantakou, AP, ‘The Misadventures of the Principle of Jura Novit Curia in International Arbitration: A Practitioner’s Approach’ in Vivliothiki, Nomiki (ed), Essays in Honour of Professor Emeritus Spyridon Vrellis (Nomiki Bibliothiki 2014) 487–498Google Scholar

Martines, F, ‘Direct Effect of International Agreements of the European Union’ (2014) 25 European Journal of International Law 129Google Scholar

Matiation, S, ‘Arbitration with Two Twists: Loewen v United States and Free Trade Commission Intervention in NAFTA Chapter 11 Disputes’ (2003) 24 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Economic Law 451Google Scholar

Matic, AA, ‘Transatlantic Trade and the Case for Investment Protection’ (2017) The German Marshall Fund of the United States, No. 20/2017Google Scholar

McDeod, I, Legal Theory (2nd edn, Palgrave 2003)Google Scholar

McDonagh, T, ‘Unfair, Unsustainable, and Under the Radar: How Corporations Use Global Investment Rules to Undermine a Sustainable Future’ (The Democracy Center, 2013) 8 <https://www.democracyctr.org/unfair-unstable-and-under-the-radar>>Google Scholar

Moldenhauer, O and Schmidt, N, ‘ECT Data Analysis: Results and Methods’ (Investigate Europe, 23 February 2021)Google Scholar

Nassar, N, ‘Internalization of State Contracts: ICSID, The Last Citadel’ (1997) 14 Journal of International Arbitration 185Google Scholar

Newcombe, A and Paradell, L, Law and Practice of Investment Treaties: Standards of Treatment (Kluwer 2009)Google Scholar

Parra, AR, The History of ICSID (2nd edn, OUP 2018)Google Scholar

Parish, M, Mirages of International Justice (Edward Elgar 2011)Google Scholar

Patomaki, H, ‘Neoliberalism and Global Financial Crisis’ (2009) 31 New Political Science 431Google Scholar

Pattison, JE, ‘The United States-Egypt Bilateral Investment Treaty: A Prototype for Future Negotiation’ (1983) 16 Cornell International Law Journal 305Google Scholar

Paulsson, J, ‘Arbitration without Privity’ (1995) 10 ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal 232Google Scholar

Paulsson, J, ‘Avoiding Unintended Consequences’ in Sauvant, KP and Chiswick-Patterson, M (eds), Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes (OUP 2008)Google Scholar

Pauwelyn, J, ‘The Rule of Law without the Rule of Lawyers? Why Investment Arbitrators Are from Mars, Trade Adjudicators from Venus’ (2015) 109 American Journal of International Law 761Google Scholar

Perrone, NM and Schneiderman, D, ‘International Economic Law’s Wreckage: Depolitization, Inequality, Precarity’ in Christodoulidis, E, Dukes, R and Goldoni, M (eds), Research Handbook on Critical Legal Theory (Edward Elgar 2019)Google Scholar

Pohl, J, Mashigo, K and Nohen, A, ‘Dispute Settlement Provisions in International Investment Agreements: A Large Sample Survey’ (OECD 2012)Google Scholar

Pollack, MA, ‘The Legitimacy of the European Court of Justice’ in Grossman, N and others (eds), Legitimacy and International Courts (CUP 2018)Google Scholar

Potestá, M and Sobat, M, ‘Frivolous Claims in International Adjudication: A Study of ICSID Rule 41(5) and of Procedures of Other Courts and Tribunals to Dismiss Claims Summarily’ (2012) 3 Journal of International Dispute Settlement 137Google Scholar

Poulsen, LNS, ‘The Importance of BITs for Foreign Direct Investment and Political Risk Insurance’ in Sauvant, Karl (ed), Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy 2009–2010 (OUP 2010)Google Scholar

Poulsen, LNS and Aisbett, E, ‘When the Claim Hits: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bounded Rational Learning’ (2013) 65 World Politics 273Google Scholar

Puig, S, ‘Social Capital in the Arbitration Market’ (2014) 25 The European Journal of International Law 387Google Scholar

Radi, Y, ‘Realizing Human Rights in Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Perspective from within the International Investment Law Toolbox’ (2011) 37 North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 1107Google Scholar

Radi, Y, ‘“Much Ado About Nothing?” An Appraisal of CETA’s Investment Chapter’ (2017) 6 ESIL Reflection 1Google Scholar

Raff, M, Private Property and Environmental Responsibility: A Comparative Study of German Real Property Law (Kluwer 2003)Google Scholar

Raz, J, The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality (Oxford Scholarship Online 2012)Google Scholar

Reisman, M, ‘The Breakdown of the Control Mechanism in ICSID Arbitration’ (1989) 4 Duke Law Journal 739Google Scholar

Reisman, M and Sloane, RD, ‘Indirect Expropriation and Its Valuation in the BIT’ (2004) Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship Series, Paper 1002Google Scholar

Rimmer, M, ‘Trojan Horse Clauses: Investor-State Dispute Settlement’, Trade and Foreign Investment (Protecting the Public Interest) Bill 2014, Submission 104 – Supplementary Submission to the Australian ParliamentGoogle Scholar

Roberts, A, ‘Power and Persuasion in Investment Treaty Arbitration: The Dual Role of States’ (2010) 104 American Journal of International Law 179Google Scholar

Roberts, A, ‘Clash of Paradigms; Actors and Analogies Shaping the Investment Treaty System’ (2013) 107 American Journal of International Law 45Google Scholar

Roberts, A, ‘Incremental, Systemic and Paradigmatic Reform of Investor–State Arbitration’ (2018) 112 American Journal of International Law 410Google Scholar

Rogers, CA, ‘The Politics of International Investment Arbitrators’ (2013) 12 Santa Clara International Law Review 223Google Scholar

Rosas, A and Armati, L, EU Constitutional Law: An Introduction (Hart 2010)Google Scholar

Rosenfeld, F, ‘Abstract Interpretations in International Investment Law’ in Pazartzis, P and others (eds), Reconceptualising the Rule of Law in Global Governance, Resources, Investment and Trade (Hart 2016)Google Scholar

Roth, BR, Governmental Illegitimacy in International Law (OUP 2000)Google Scholar

Rubins, N, ‘Loewen v United States: The Burial of an Investor–State Arbitration Claim’ (2005) 21 Arbitration International 1Google Scholar

Rusche, TM, ‘Available Actions in the German Courts against the Abuse of Intra-EU Investor-State Arbitration Proceedings’ (2021) 6 IPRax 494Google Scholar

Sacerdoti, G, ‘Investment Arbitration under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules: Prerequisites, Applicable Law, Review of Awards’ (2004) 19 ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal 1Google Scholar

Sadowski, W, ‘Protection of the Rule of Law in the European Union through Investment Treaty Arbitration: Is Judicial Monopolism the Right Response to Illiberal Tendencies in Europe?’ (2018) 55 Common Market Law Review 1025Google Scholar

Sartre, JP, Critique of Dialectical Reason (Alan Sheridan-Smith tr, Verso 2004) vol 1Google Scholar

Sass, SL, ‘Foreign Law in Civil Litigation: A Comparative Survey’ (1968) 16 The American Journal of Comparative Law 332Google Scholar

Scharpf, F, ‘Economic Integration, Democracy and the Welfare State’ (1997) 4 Journal of European Policy 18Google Scholar

Scharpf, F, ‘Problem-Solving Effectiveness and Democratic Accountability in the EU’ (2003) Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies Working Paper 03/1 <http://apps.eui.eu/Personal/Researchers/pblokker/Week%206_Scharpf.pdf>>Google Scholar

Scheuerman, WE, ‘Economic Globalization and the Rule of Law’ (1999) 6 Constellations 3Google Scholar

Schiemann, K, ‘From Common Law Judge to European Judge’ (2005) 13 Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 741Google Scholar

Schill, SW, The Multilateralisation of International Investment Law (CUP 2009)Google Scholar

Schill, SW, ‘Enhancing International Investment Law’s Legitimacy: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations of a New Public Law Approach’ (2011) 52 Virginia Journal of International Law 57Google Scholar

Schmidt, VA, ‘Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and “Throughput”’ (2013) 61 Political Studies 2Google Scholar

Schneiderman, D, ‘Global Constitutionalism and Its Legitimacy Problems: Human Rights, Proportionality and International Investment Law’ (2017) 12 Journal of Law and Ethics of Human Rights 251Google Scholar

Schreuer, C, ‘Travelling the BIT Route of Waiting Periods, Umbrella Clauses and Forks in the Road’ (2004) 5 The Journal of World Investment and Trade 231Google Scholar

Shalakany, AA, ‘Arbitration and the Third World: A Plea for Reassessing Bias under the Specter of Neoliberalism’ (2000) 41 Harvard International Law Review 419Google Scholar

Shany, Y, ‘Stronger Together? Legitimacy and Effectiveness of International Courts as Mutually Reinforcing or Undermining Notions’ in Grossman, N and others (eds), Legitimacy and International Courts (CUP 2018)Google Scholar

Shelton, D, ‘Article 47’ in Peers, S and others (eds), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary (Hart 2014)Google Scholar

Shihata, I, ‘The World Bank and Private Sector Development – A Legal Perspective’ in Tschofen, F and Parra, AR (eds), The World Bank in a Changing World (Brill 1991) vol 1Google Scholar

Sklair, L, ‘The Transnational Capitalist Class and the Discourse of Globalisation’ (2000) 14 Cambridge Review of International Affairs 67Google Scholar

Smit, H, ‘The Pernicious Institution of the Party-Appointed Arbitrator’ (2010) 33 Columbia FDI PerspectivesGoogle Scholar

Snell, J, ‘Non-discriminatory Tax Obstacles in Community Law’ (2007) 56 The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 339Google Scholar

Spencer, ME, ‘Weber on Legitimate Norms and Authority’ (1970) 21 The British Journal of Sociology 123Google Scholar

Stiglitz, J, ‘The Secret Corporate Takeover’ (Project Syndicate, 17 May 2015) <https://www.economics.utoronto.ca/gindart/2015-05-13%20-%20The%20secret%20corporate%20takeover.pdf>>Google Scholar

Stone Sweet, A, Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe (OUP 2010)Google Scholar

Stone Sweet, A, ‘The European Court of Justice and the Judicialization of EU Governance’ (2010) Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship Series Paper No. 70Google Scholar

Stone Sweet, A, ‘Arbitration and Judicialisation’ (2011) 1 Oñati Socio-Legal Series 1Google Scholar

Strik, P, Shaping the Single European Market in the Field of Foreign Direct Investment (CUP 2014)Google Scholar

Suse, A and Wouters, J, ‘The Provisional Application of the EU’s Mixed Trade and Investment Agreements’ (2018) Working Paper No. 201Google Scholar

Szilágyi, SG, ‘It Is Not Just About Investor-State Arbitration: A Look at Case C-284/16, Achmea BV’ (2018) 3 European Papers 357Google Scholar

Thurow, LC, The Future of Capitalism: How the Today’s Economic Forces Will Shape Tomorrow’s World (William Morrow and Company 1996)Google Scholar

Titi, C, ‘The Right to Regulate’ in Mbengue, MM and Schacherer, S (eds), Foreign Investment under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (Springer 2019)Google Scholar

Tropper, J and Reinisch, A, ‘The 2020 Termination Agreement of Intra-EU BITs and Its Effect on Investment Arbitration in the EU’ (2022) 16 The Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration 301Google Scholar

Ünüvar, G, ‘Is CETA the Promised Breakthrough? Interpretation and Evaluation of Fair and Equitable Treatment and (Indirect) Expropriation Provisions’ (June 2017) iCourts Working Paper Series No. 97 <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2986049%20>>Google Scholar

Van den Berghe, A, Schaugg, L and de Anzizu, H, ‘The New Energy Charter Treaty in Light of the Climate Emergency’ (Jus Mundi, 6 July 2022)Google Scholar

Van Der Loo, G and Wessel, RA, ‘The Non-ratification of Mixed Agreements: Legal Consequences and Solutions’ (2017) 54(3) Common Market Law Review 735Google Scholar

Vandevelde, KJ, ‘The Political Economy of a Bilateral Investment Treaty’ (1998) 92 The American Journal of International Law 621Google Scholar

Vandevelde, KJ, ‘A Brief History of International Investment Agreements’ (2005) 12 UC Davis Journal of International Law and Policy 157Google Scholar

Van Harten, HHA, ‘The Emerging System of International Investment Arbitration’ (DPhil thesis, London School of Economics 2005)Google Scholar

Van Harten, HHA, ‘Pro-Investor or Pro-State Bias in Investment-Treaty Arbitration? Forthcoming Study Gives Cause for Concern’ (2012) Editorials and Commentaries 136Google Scholar

Van Harten, HHA, ‘Arbitrator Behaviour in Asymmetrical Adjudication: An Empirical Study of Investment Treaty Arbitration’ (2012) 50 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 211Google Scholar

Van Harten, HHA, ‘Leaders in the Expansive and Restrictive Interpretation of Investment Treaties: A Descriptive Study of ISDS Awards to 2010’ (2018) 29 European Journal of International Law 507Google Scholar

Van Harten, HHA and Loughlin, M, ‘Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law’ (2006) 17 European Journal of International Law 121Google Scholar

Waibel, M and Wu, Y, ‘Are Arbitrators Political? Evidence from International Investment Arbitration’ (2017) <https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0be8/b7c939d4943917b9879ebd4183afe98b8c55.pdf>>Google Scholar

Wälde, TW, ‘Interpreting Investment Treaties: Experiences and Examples’ in International Investment Law for 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Christoph Schreuer (OUP 2009)Google Scholar

Weiler, JHH, ‘The Transformation of Europe’ (1991) 100 Yale Law Journal 2403Google Scholar

Weiler, JHH, ‘Europe in Crisis – On “Political Messianism”, “Legitimacy” and “the Rule of Law”’ (2012) Singapore Journal of Legal Studies 248Google Scholar

Witherell, WH, ‘Developing International Rules for Foreign Investment: OECD’s Multilateral Agreement on Investment’ (1997) 32 Business Economics 38Google Scholar

Wöss, H and San Román, A, ‘Full Compensation, Full Reparation and the But-For Premise’ (Global Arbitration Review, 29 November 2018) <https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1177419/full-compensation-full-reparation-and-the-but-for-premise>>Google Scholar

Yackee, JW, ‘Conceptual Differences in the Empirical Study of Bilateral Investment Treaties’ (2008) 33 Brooklyn Journal of International Law 405Google Scholar

Young, AR, ‘European Trade Policy in Interesting Times’ (2017) 39 Journal of European Integration 909Google Scholar

Zárate, JMA, ‘Legitimacy Concerns of the Proposed Multilateral Investment Court: Is Democracy Possible?’ (2019) South Centre Investment Policy BriefGoogle Scholar

Zhu, W, ‘Some Considerations on the Civil, Commercial and Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism between China and the Other Belt and Road Countries’ in Chaisse, J and Gorski, J (eds), The Belt and Road Initiative: Law, Economics and Politics (Brill 2018)Google Scholar

Cecilia Malmström, EU Commissioner for Trade, ‘Discussion on Investment in TTIP at the Meeting of the International Trade Committee of the European Parliament’ (Speech/15/4624, 18 March 2015) <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_15_4624>>Google Scholar

Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament, ‘Opinion of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs for the Committee on International Trade on Recommendations to the Commission on the Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)’ (16 May 2015) 2014/2228(INI)Google Scholar

Committee on Foreign Affairs of European Parliament, ‘Opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs for the Committee on International Trade on Recommendations to the Commission on the Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)’ (1 April 2015) 2014/2228(INI)Google Scholar

Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament, ‘Opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs for the Committee on International Trade on Recommendations to the Commission on the Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)’ (4 May 2015) 2014/2228(INI)Google Scholar

Communication of 4 October 2006 from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Global Europe: Competing in the World – Contribution to the EU’s Growth and Jobs Strategy’, COM (2006) 567 finalGoogle Scholar

Communication of 19 July 2018 from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, ‘Protection of Intra-EU Investment’, COM (2018) 547 finalGoogle Scholar

Communication of 18 February 2021 from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Trade Policy Review – An Open, Sustainable and Assertive Trade Policy’, COM (2021) 66/2 finalGoogle Scholar

Communication of 22 June 2022 from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘The Power of Trade Partnerships: Together for Green and Just Economic Growth’, COM (2022) 409 finalGoogle Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada, of the One Part, and the European Union and Its Member States, of the Other Part – Statements to the Council Minutes’ (27 October 2016) 13463/1/16Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Conclusions on a Comprehensive European International Investment Policy’, 3041st Foreign Affairs Council Meeting (25 October 2010)Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Directives for the Negotiation on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the European Union and the United States of America’ (17 June 2013) 11103/13 DCL 1 (declassified)Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Draft Council Conclusions on the Negotiation and Conclusion of EU Trade Agreements’ (8 May 2018) 8622/18Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Negotiating Directives for a Convention Establishing a Multilateral Court for the Settlement of Investment Disputes’ (20 March 2018) 12981/17 ADD 1 DCL 1Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Negotiating Directives for the Modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty – Adoption’ (2 July 2019) 10745/19Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, ‘Negotiating Directives for the Negotiation of an Agreement on Investment Facilitation with the Republic of Angola’ (10 May 2021) 8441/21Google Scholar

Declaration of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 15 January 2019 on the Legal Consequences of the Judgment of the Court of Justice in Achmea and on Investment Protection in the European UnionGoogle Scholar

Declaration of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 16 January 2019 on the Enforcement of the Judgment of the Court of Justice in Achmea and on Investment Protection in the European Union (signed by Sweden, Luxembourg, Malta, Finland, and Slovenia)Google Scholar

Declaration of the Representative of the Government of Hungary of 16 January 2019 on the Legal Consequences of the Judgment of the Court of Justice in Achmea and on Investment Protection in the European UnionGoogle Scholar

Directorate-General for External Policies of the European Parliament, ‘Comparing International Trade Policies: The EU, United States, EFTA and Japanese PTA Strategies, European Parliament’ (February 2014) EXPO/B/INTA/FWC/2009-01/Lot7/36Google Scholar

Directorate-General for External Policies of the European Parliament, ‘Investor–State Dispute Settlement Provisions in the EU’s International Investment Agreements: Volume 2-Studies’ (September 2014) EXPO/B/INTA/2014/08-09-10Google Scholar

Directorate General for External Policies of the European Parliament, ‘The Investment Chapters of the EU’s International Trade and Investment Agreements in a Comparative Perspective’ (September 2015) EP/EXPO/B/INTA/2015/01Google Scholar

Economic and Financial Committee, ‘2007 EFC Report to the Commission and the Council on the Movement of Capital and the Freedom of Payments’ (8 January 2008) 5123/08Google Scholar

Economic and Financial Committee, ‘2008 EFC Report to the Commission and the Council on the Movement of Capital and the Freedom of Payments’ (17 December 2008) 17363/08Google Scholar

Economic and Financial Committee, ‘2009 EFC Report to the Commission and the Council on the Movement of Capital and the Freedom of Payments’ (10 December 2009) 17446/09Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Energy Charter Treaty, Background Note’ (16 December 1994) MEMO/94/75 <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_94_75>>Google Scholar

European Commission Staff Working Document – Annex to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Global Europe: Competing in the World – Contribution to the EU’s Growth and Jobs Strategy (2006) SEC/2006/1230Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Towards a Comprehensive European International Investment Policy’, COM (2010) 343Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Trade, Growth and World Affairs: Trade Policy as a Core Component of the EU’s 2020 Strategy’, COM (2010) 612Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Follow up to the European Parliament Resolution on the Future European International Investment Policy’ (5 July 2011)Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Decision Requesting an Opinion of the Court of Justice Pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU on the Competence of the Union to Sign and Conclude a Free Trade Agreement with Singapore’, COM (2014) 8218 finalGoogle Scholar

European Commission, ‘Online Public Consultation on Investment Protection and Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement (TTIP)’, SDW (2015) 3 finalGoogle Scholar

European Commission, ‘Trade for All: Towards a More Responsible Trade and Investment Policy’, COM (2015) 497Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Investment in TTIP and beyond – The Path for Reform. Enhancing the Right to Regulate and Moving from Current Ad Hoc Arbitration towards an Investment Court’ (5 May 2015)Google Scholar

European Commission Press Release, ‘Commission Proposes New Investment Court System for TTIP and Other EU Trade and Investment Negotiations’ (16 September 2015) <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_15_5651>>Google Scholar

European Commission Press Release, ‘EU Finalises Proposal for Investment Protection and Court System for TTIP’ (12 November 2015) <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1396>>Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘A Balanced and Progressive Trade Policy to Harness Globalisation’, COM (2017) 492Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Reflection Paper on Harnessing Globalisation’, COM (2017) 240Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Multilateral Reform of Investment Dispute Resolution, Impact Assessment’, SWD (2017) 302 finalGoogle Scholar

European Commission, ‘A New EU Trade Agreement with Japan’, Factsheet (July 2018) <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/july/tradoc_155684.pdf>>Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Application of Regulation (EU) No 1219/2012 Establishing Transitional Arrangements for Bilateral Investment Agreements between Member States and Third Countries’, COM (2020) 134 finalGoogle Scholar

European Commission, ‘EU–Mexico Agreement in Principle’ (European Commission, 6 May 2020) <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1833>>Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘October Infringements Package: Key Decisions’ (30 October 2020)Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘December Infringements Package: Key Decisions’ (2 December 2021)Google Scholar

European Commission, ‘Cross-border Investment within the EU – Clarifying and Supplementing EU Rules’ (26 May 2020) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12403-Investment-protection-and-facilitation-framework/public-consultation>>Google Scholar

European Commission, Inception Impact Assessment, Ares(2020)2716046Google Scholar

European Commission, A European Green Deal (2019)Google Scholar

European Commission, 'EU-New Zealand: Text of the agreement' (2022) https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/new-zealand/eu-new-zealand-agreement/text-agreement_enGoogle Scholar

European Commission, Overview of FTA and Other Trade Negotiations (2022)Google Scholar

European Parliament, ‘Report Containing the European Parliament’s Recommendations to the European Commission on the Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)’ (1 June 2015) 2014/2228(INI)Google Scholar

European Parliament, ‘Resolution of 23 November 2022 on the Outcome of the Modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty’ 2022/2934(RSP)Google Scholar

European Parliamentary Research Service, ‘EU Competence in Private Law’ (2015)Google Scholar

‘Joint Statement: Canada–EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA)’ (26 February 2016) <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_16_446>>Google Scholar

‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937,’ COM (2022) 71Google Scholar

‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism’, COM (2021) 564Google Scholar

‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Applying a Generalised Scheme of Tariff Preferences and Repealing Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council’, COM (2021) 579 finalGoogle Scholar

‘Report from the Commission to the EP, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Implementation and Enforcement of EU Trade Agreements’, COM (2021) 654 finalGoogle Scholar

Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, UNGA Res 3201 (S-VI) (1 May 1974) UN Doc A/RES/320 (S-VI)Google Scholar

Havana Charter for an International Trade Organisation (1948) UN Doc E/CONF.2/78Google Scholar

ILC, ‘Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with Commentaries’ (1966)Google Scholar

ILC, ‘Report of the International Law Commission to the General Assembly on the Work of Its Thirtieth Session’ (1978) UN Doc A/33/10Google Scholar

ILC, ‘Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law’ (2006) Report of the Study Group, UN Doc A/CN.4/L682Google Scholar

UNGA, ‘Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Forty-Eighth Session’ (July 2015) UN Doc A/70/17Google Scholar

UNGA, ‘Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Fiftieth Session’ (July 2017) UN Doc A/72/17Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Arbitration Rules’ (2010) <http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/arb-rules-revised/arb-rules-revised-2010-e.pdf>>Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Rules on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor–State Arbitration’ (2014) <https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/rules-on-transparency-e.pdf>>Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Future Work in the Field of Dispute Settlement: Reforms of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)’ Note by the Secretariat (20 April 2017) UN Doc A/CN.9/917Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)’ Note by the Secretariat (30 July 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.166Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Submissions from International Organisations’ (13 October 2017) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.143Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Submission from the European Union’ (12 December 2017) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.145Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Fourth Session (Vienna, 27 November – 1 December 2017)’ (19 December 2017) UN Doc A/CN.9/930/Rev.1Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Fifth Session (New York, 23–27 April 2018)’ (14 May 2018) UN Doc A/CN.9/935Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Consistency and Related Matters’ Note by the Secretariat (28 August 2018) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.150Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Ensuring Independence and Impartiality on the Part of Arbitrators and Decision Makers in ISDS’ Note by the Secretariat (30 August 2018) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.151Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Arbitrators and Decision Makers: Appointment Mechanisms and Related Issues’ Note by the Secretariat (30 August 2018) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.152Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Cost and Duration’ (31 August 2018) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.153Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Third-Party Funding’ Note by the Secretariat (24 January 2019) A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.157Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Submission from the European Union and Its Member States’ (24 January 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.159/Add.1Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Submission from the Governments of Chile, Israel and Japan’ (15 March 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.163Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Seventh Session (New York, 1–5 April 2019)’ (9 April 2019) A/CN.9/970Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute settlement (ISDS), Submission from the Government of Brazil’ (11 June 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.171Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Submission from the Government of South Africa’ (17 July 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.176Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Submission from the Government of China’ (19 July 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.177Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)’ Note by the Secretariat (30 July 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.166Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Advisory Centre’ (25 July 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.168Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Submission from the Governments of Chile, Israel, Japan, Mexico and Peru’ Note by the Secretariat (2 October 2019) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.182Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Multilateral Instrument on ISDS Reform’ Note by the Secretariat (16 January 2020) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.194Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Eighth Session’ (28 January 2020) UN Doc A/CN.9/1004Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Resumed Thirty-Eighth Session’ (28 January 2020) UN Doc A/CN/9/1004/Add.1Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Workplan to Implement ISDS Reform and Resource Requirements’ (17 March 2021) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.206Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Initial Draft on Standing Multilateral Mechanism: The Selection and Appointment of ISDS Tribunal Members and Related Matters, Comments from the EU and Its Member States’ (November 2021)Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Cost and Financing of a Permanent Multilateral Body’, Outline of the Working Paper, Draft for Comments Only (December 2021)Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Expedited Arbitration Rules’ (2021)Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Multilateral Instrument on ISDS Reform’ Note by the Secretariat (22 July 2022) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.221Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Possible Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Draft Codes of Conduct and Commentary’ Note by the Secretariat (23 November 2022) UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.223Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Working Group III: Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform’ <https://uncitral.un.org/en/working_groups/3/investor-state>>Google Scholar

UNCITRAL, ‘Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform: On-Line Resources’ Working Group III: Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform <https://uncitral.un.org/en/library/online_resources/investor-state_dispute>>Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Lessons from the MAI’ (1999) UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/Misc.22Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘International Investment Agreements: Key Issues’ (2004) UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10 (Vol. I)Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Recent Developments in International Investment Agreements’ (2005) IIA Monitor No. 2, UNCTAD/WEB/ITE/IIT/2005/1Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Scope and Definition (A Sequel) – UNCTAD Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements II’ (2011) UNCTAD/DIAE/IA/2010/2Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Fair and Equitable Treatment’ (2012) Issues in International Investment Agreements (Second series) UNCTAD/DIAE/IA/2011/5Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Bilateral Investment Treaties 1959–1999’ (2000) UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘Trade and Development Report 2014: Global Governance and Policy Space for Development’ (2014) UNCTAD/TDR/2014Google Scholar

UNCTAD, ‘UNCTAD’s Reform Package for the International Investment Regime (2018 edition)’ (2018) <https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/publications/1190/unctad-s-reform-package-for-the-international-investment-regime-2018-edition->>Google Scholar

UNCTAD, Investment Policy Hub <https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org>>Google Scholar

UNDOC, ‘The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct’ (2018) ECOSOC 2006/23Google Scholar

United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), ‘The Promotion of International Flow of Private Capital: Progress Report by the Secretary General’ (26 February 1960) E/3325Google Scholar

‘300+ Civil Society Organisations from 73 Countries Urge Real Reform at United Nations Discussions on Corporate Investor Rights’ (Center for International Environmental Law, 30 October 2018) <https://www.ciel.org/news/300-civil-society-organizations-from-73-countries-urge-real-reform-at-united-nations-discussions-on-corporate-investor-rights/>>Google Scholar

American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union, ‘AmCham EU’s Response to the European Commission’s Public Consultation on Modalities for Investment Protection and ISDS in TTIP’ Consultation Response (11 July 2014) <https://www.amchameu.eu/sites/default/files/position_papers/file_20140717_105720_LFEcSE_0.pdf>>Google Scholar

‘An Open Letter to the Chair of UNCITRAL Working Group III and to all Participating States Concerning the Reform of the Investor–State Dispute Settlement: Addressing the Asymmetry of ISDS’ (Erasmus University Rotterdam, 13 February 2019) <https://www.eur.nl/en/news/erasmus-institute-public-knowledge>>Google Scholar

Client Earth, ‘Potential Solutions for Phase 3: Aligning the Objectives of UNCITRAL Working Group III with States’ International Obligations to Combat Climate Change’ <https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/wgiii_clientearth.pdf>>Google Scholar

Columbia Center on Sustainable Development (CCSI), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) Joint Submission to UNCITRAL, ‘UNCITRAL Working Group III on ISDS Reform: How Cross-Cutting Issues Reshape Reform Options’ (15 July 2019)Google Scholar

Columbia Center on Sustainable Development (CCSI), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) Workplan Submission (1 March 2021)Google Scholar

Commission of Venice, ‘The Rule of Law Checklist’ (Council of Europe 2016)Google Scholar

Corporate Counsel International Arbitration Group, ‘Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Reform, Submission by the Corporate Counsel International Arbitration Group (CCIAG) to UNCITRAL Working Group III’ (18 December 2019)Google Scholar

Council of Europe, European Charter on the Statute for Judges (1998)Google Scholar

Council of Europe, Recommendation CM/Rec (2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on Judges: Independence, Efficiency and Responsibilities (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 November 2010 at the 1098th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)Google Scholar

Draft Convention on the Protection of Foreign Property, Text with Notes and Comments (OECD Publication No. 15637, December 1962)Google Scholar

Energy Charter Secretariat, ‘Decision of the Energy Charter Conference: Adoption by Correspondence – Policy Options for Modernisation of the ECT’ (6 October 2019) CCDEC 2019Google Scholar

Energy Charter Secretariat, ‘Decision of the Energy Charter Conference’ (24 June 2022) CCDEC 2022Google Scholar

European Federation for Investment Law and Arbitration, ‘EFILA’s Written Comments Made at the UNCITRAL Working Group on ISDS Reform’ (June 2018)Google Scholar

German Magistrates Association, ‘Opinion No 04/16 on the Establishment of an Investment Tribunal in TTIP’ (February 2016)Google Scholar

German Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (2008) <https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/treaty-files/2865/download>>Google Scholar

Government of the Republic of Croatia, Answer to the Written Question Posed by MP Goran Aleksic in Relation to a Proceeding before ICSID in Washington (October 2017) (in Croatian) <https://vlada.gov.hr/UserDocsImages//2016/Sjednice/2017/10%20listopad/64%20sjednica%20Vlade%20Republike%20Hrvatske//64%20-%2024.3.pdf>>Google Scholar

Government of the Netherlands, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate of the Netherlands, Letter to the Parliament (17 May 2021)Google Scholar

Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats in the European Parliament, ‘S&D Position Paper on Investor–State Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Ongoing Trade Negotiations’ (4 March 2015) <https://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/sites/default/files/position_paper/ISDS_mechanisms_ongoing_trade_negotiations_en_150304.pdf>>Google Scholar

International Bar Association Guidelines on Conflict of Interest in International Arbitration <https://www.ibanet.org/Publications/publications_IBA_guides_and_free_materials.aspx>>Google Scholar

ICSID, ‘History of the ICSID Convention, Documents Concerning the Origin and the Formulation of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States’ (1968)Google Scholar

The ICSID Rules of Procedure for Arbitration Proceedings (April 2006) <https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Documents/icsiddocs/ICSID%20Convention%20English.pdf>>Google Scholar

ICSID, Amended Rules (July 2022)Google Scholar

International Commission of Jurists, ‘International Principles on the Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors’ (2007) Practitioner Guide No. 1Google Scholar

IPCC, ‘Climate Change 2022, Mitigation of Climate Change’, Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (4 April 2022)Google Scholar

Jaap-Verbeek, B, ‘A Social Mapping of the UNCITRAL Process on ISDS Reform’ (2020) <https://kumu.io/bjverbeek/uncitral#uncitral>>Google Scholar

Model Text for the Indian Bilateral Investment Treaty <https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/ModelBIT_Annex_0.pdf>>Google Scholar

NAFTA Free Trade Commission, ‘Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions’ (31 July 2001) <http://www.sice.oas.org/tpd/nafta/Commission/CH11understanding_e.asp>>Google Scholar

Netherlands Model Investment Agreement (2019)Google Scholar

<https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/treaty-files/5832/download>>Google Scholar

OECD, ‘OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ (OECD 2018) <https://mneguidelines.oecd.org>>Google Scholar

OECD, ‘Investment Treaties and Climate Change’, Public Consultation, Compilation of Submissions (13 April 2022)Google Scholar

Pew Research Center and Bertelsmann Foundation, ‘Support in Principle for US–EU Trade Deal, But Some Americans and Germans Wary of TTIP Details’ (Pew Research Center, 9 April 2014) <https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/04/09/support-in-principle-for-u-s-eu-trade-pact/>>Google Scholar

Polish Government, ‘White Paper on the Reform of Polish Judiciary’ (7 March 2018) <https://www.premier.gov.pl/files/files/white_paper_en_full.pdf>>Google Scholar

Public Citizen, ‘Recommendations for UNCITRAL ISDS Discussions’ (15 July 2019)Google Scholar

SADC Model Bilateral Investment Treaty Template with Commentary (July 2012) <https://www.iisd.org/itn/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/sadc-model-bit-template-final.pdf>>Google Scholar

‘Statement on the Modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty’ (3 November 2020)Google Scholar

‘Trading Together – For Strong and Democratically Legitimized EU International Agreements’ (25 January 2017) <https://www.trading-together-declaration.org>>Google Scholar

Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, ‘The Role of National Parliaments in Free Trade Agreements’ (17 June 2014) <https://www.parlament.mt/media/89931/81.pdf>>Google Scholar

Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, ‘Improvements to CETA and beyond’ (6 March 2015)Google Scholar

The Secretariat of the ECT, ‘Statistics of the ECT Cases’ (10 January 2023) <https://www.energychartertreaty.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Statistics/All_statistics_-_10_January_2023.pdf>>Google Scholar

UK Government Department for International Trade, ‘UK–US Trade & Investment Working Group’ (2–7 November 2018) 32–33 (Global Justice Now, 27 November 2019) <https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/2019/nov/27/explosive-leaked-trade-papers-show-nhs-chlorinated-chicken-already-table-us-trade>>Google Scholar

US Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (2012) <https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/BIT%20text%20for%20ACIEP%20Meeting.pdf>>Google Scholar

Queen Mary University, ‘2020 QMUL-CCIAG Survey: Investors’ Perceptions of ISDS’ (May 2020)Google Scholar

World Bank, ‘Disputes over Defaults on External Debt, Expropriation, and Breach of Contract’ (July 2001) Operational Manual OP 7.40Google Scholar

World Trade Organization, ‘World Trade Report 2011, The WTO and Preferential Trade Agreements: From Co-existence to Coherence’ (2011)Google Scholar