Beyond Abaclat : Mass Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Regulatory Governance for Sovereign Debt Restructuring

K. Nakajima
{"title":"Beyond Abaclat : Mass Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Regulatory Governance for Sovereign Debt Restructuring","authors":"K. Nakajima","doi":"10.1163/22119000-12340071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whereas investment treaties and arbitration rules do not usually provide any explicit provision for mass claims in investment treaty arbitration, the Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina established a landmark jurisprudence that allowed a massive 60,000 investors to bundle and bring their claims before a single arbitral tribunal. However, its reasoning has been severely criticised for its conclusion, which apparently favours bondholder protection at the expense of financial policy leeway of defaulted sovereigns: investment arbitration may adversely affect the orderly implementation of sovereign debt restructuring. This article attempts to take a more balanced approach towards this issue, by focusing on regulatory aspects of arbitral proceedings. A ‘regulatory’ investment treaty arbitration will not only provide creditor protection by opening the door for mass claims, but will also show a deference to an orderly restructuring by closing the door if circumstances so require.","PeriodicalId":163787,"journal":{"name":"The journal of world investment and trade","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of world investment and trade","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Whereas investment treaties and arbitration rules do not usually provide any explicit provision for mass claims in investment treaty arbitration, the Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina established a landmark jurisprudence that allowed a massive 60,000 investors to bundle and bring their claims before a single arbitral tribunal. However, its reasoning has been severely criticised for its conclusion, which apparently favours bondholder protection at the expense of financial policy leeway of defaulted sovereigns: investment arbitration may adversely affect the orderly implementation of sovereign debt restructuring. This article attempts to take a more balanced approach towards this issue, by focusing on regulatory aspects of arbitral proceedings. A ‘regulatory’ investment treaty arbitration will not only provide creditor protection by opening the door for mass claims, but will also show a deference to an orderly restructuring by closing the door if circumstances so require.
超越Abaclat:投资条约仲裁中的大量索赔和主权债务重组的监管治理
尽管投资条约和仲裁规则通常不会对投资条约仲裁中的大规模索赔提供任何明确规定,但Abaclat诉阿根廷案的仲裁庭建立了一个具有里程碑意义的判例,允许6万多名投资者将其索赔捆绑在一起,提交给一个仲裁庭。然而,其推理因其结论而受到严厉批评,该结论显然有利于以牺牲违约主权国家的金融政策回旋余地为代价保护债券持有人:投资仲裁可能对主权债务重组的有序实施产生不利影响。本文试图通过关注仲裁程序的监管方面,对这一问题采取一种更为平衡的方法。“监管性”投资条约仲裁不仅将为大规模索赔打开大门,从而为债权人提供保护,而且还将在情况需要时关闭大门,以示对有序重组的尊重。
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
小红书