Distinguishing Investors from Exporters Under Investment Treaties

M. Feldman
{"title":"Distinguishing Investors from Exporters Under Investment Treaties","authors":"M. Feldman","doi":"10.1163/9789004291102_035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multinational corporations, when engaging in global operations, often act as both investors and exporters. Such intertwined investment and export operations can significantly complicate the application of investment treaty protections, which generally are intended to apply to investors, but not to exporters. When attempting to distinguish investor and exporter activities, tribunals constituted under the investment chapter of the NAFTA have considered three kinds of limitations on recovery: (i) a causation limitation, (ii) a territorial limitation, and (iii) a capacity limitation. Of these three alternatives, the capacity limitation has the greatest potential to serve as an adaptable, effective criterion for ensuring full treaty protections for foreign investment while safeguarding against the exploitation of NAFTA's investment chapter by exporters. When determining whether a claimant has acted in its capacity as an investor, a tribunal should be guided by the nature of a claimant's global business. The capacity limitation can be applied not only in NAFTA Chapter Eleven cases, but also more generally in disputes under other investment treaties, so long as textual support for the limitation exists under the applicable treaty. Thus, the capacity limitation can serve as a widely-available and effective resource for tribunals facing challenging questions concerning the proper application of investment treaty protections to integrated investment and export operations of multinational corporations.","PeriodicalId":313622,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","volume":"165 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004291102_035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Multinational corporations, when engaging in global operations, often act as both investors and exporters. Such intertwined investment and export operations can significantly complicate the application of investment treaty protections, which generally are intended to apply to investors, but not to exporters. When attempting to distinguish investor and exporter activities, tribunals constituted under the investment chapter of the NAFTA have considered three kinds of limitations on recovery: (i) a causation limitation, (ii) a territorial limitation, and (iii) a capacity limitation. Of these three alternatives, the capacity limitation has the greatest potential to serve as an adaptable, effective criterion for ensuring full treaty protections for foreign investment while safeguarding against the exploitation of NAFTA's investment chapter by exporters. When determining whether a claimant has acted in its capacity as an investor, a tribunal should be guided by the nature of a claimant's global business. The capacity limitation can be applied not only in NAFTA Chapter Eleven cases, but also more generally in disputes under other investment treaties, so long as textual support for the limitation exists under the applicable treaty. Thus, the capacity limitation can serve as a widely-available and effective resource for tribunals facing challenging questions concerning the proper application of investment treaty protections to integrated investment and export operations of multinational corporations.
根据投资协定区分投资者和出口商
跨国公司在从事全球业务时,往往既是投资者又是出口商。这种相互交织的投资和出口业务可能会使投资条约保护措施的适用大大复杂化,这些保护措施通常适用于投资者,而不适用于出口商。在试图区分投资者和出口商活动时,根据《北美自由贸易协定》投资章节组成的法庭考虑了三种对恢复的限制:(i)因果关系限制,(ii)地域限制,和(iii)能力限制。在这三种备选办法中,能力限制最有可能成为一种适应性强的有效标准,以确保条约对外国投资的充分保护,同时防止出口商利用北美自由贸易协定的投资章节。在确定申索人是否以投资者身份行事时,仲裁庭应以申索人全球业务的性质为指导。能力限制不仅可以适用于北美自由贸易协定第11章的案件,而且可以更普遍地适用于其他投资条约下的争端,只要在适用的条约下存在对这种限制的文本支持。因此,能力限制可以作为法庭面对有关对跨国公司的综合投资和出口业务适当适用投资条约保护的挑战性问题时广泛可用的有效资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信