Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-08T15:38:04.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investment Protection Law and Sources of Law: A Critical Look

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Martins Paparinskis
Martins Paparinskis*
Affiliation:
The Queen’s College, University of Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
New Voices: Rethinking the Sources of International Law
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 103 , 2009 , pp. 76 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2009

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.)

References

1 Discussion, 21 ASIL Proc. 29, 35-36 (1927).

2 E.g., the explanation of the role of cause, object, forum selection, and attribution in treaty claims regarding contractual issues, Compañiá de Aguas del Aconquija S.A. and Vivendi Universal v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3, Decision on Annulment, July 3, 2002, 17 ICSID Rev. 168 (2002).

3 Paparinskis, Martins, Barcelona Traction: A Friend of Investment Protection Law , 8 Baltic Ybk of Intl L. 105 (2008)Google Scholar.

4 Lauterpacht, Elihu, The Development of the Law of International Organization by the Decisions of International Tribunals, 152 Recueil Des Cours 377, 396 (1976 IV)Google Scholar; Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine), Judgment, 2009 ICJ Rep. (February 3), obtainable from <www.ICJ-cij.org>, ¶¶ 133-134.

5 Aegean Sea Continental Shelf Case (Greece v. Turkey), Judgment, 1978 ICJ Rep. 3, 33, ¶¶ 77-78 (Dec. 19).

6 The Canadian Cattlemen for Free Trade v. Canada, UNCITRAL Arbitration, Award on Jurisdiction, Jan 28, 2008, available at <http://ita.law.uvic.ca/docurnents/Ccft-Usaaward_000.pdf>, ¶¶ 164-169.

7 SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A. v. Republic of the Philippines, ICSID Case Nos. ARB/02/6 and ARB/04/08, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction, Jan. 29, 2004, available at <http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/SGSvPhil-final_001.pdf>, ¶ 97.

8 Saipem S.p.A. v Bangladesh, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/07, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures, Mar. 21, 2007, 22 ICSID Rev. 100, ¶ 67 (2007).

9 IV League of Nations Conference for the Codification of International Law [1930] 1442-76, 1583 (Shabtai Rosenne, ed., 1975).