Moral Damages in International Investment Law

Виктория Владимировна Польшакова
{"title":"Moral Damages in International Investment Law","authors":"Виктория Владимировна Польшакова","doi":"10.17323/jil.2023.18757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the notion of moral damages in international investment arbitration. Although there are currently more than 2500 bilateral investment agreements (hereinafter — BIT) in force, none of them regulates moral damages. The analysis focuses on the historical background of moral damages, which shows that international law has not been overly concerned with their assessment within the last hundred years. As such, despite their almost universal acceptance by international courts and tribunals, there is still no guidance for tribunals on how to approach moral damages, making their assessment a topical issue of modern international law. The article highlights the reasons tribunals give for either completely disregarding such claims, or granting merely symbolic sums, such as non-tangible nature of moral damages, lack of any concrete evidence, or an extremely high threshold. The author concludes that international law still lacks a strict and uniform test, when it comes to moral damages, which are bound to face rather broad and subjective decisions rendered by the tribunals. The author further discusses the problem of assessing moral damages, which also lacks established methodology, and often refers to national law of domestic legal systems instead of a unified standard. In some cases, tribunals do not provide any reasoning or legal basis for their assessment. The author concludes that in the absence of a strict test, investment tribunals may turn to human rights instruments to make the assessment of moral damages clearer and more consistent.","PeriodicalId":512122,"journal":{"name":"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)","volume":"55 35","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jil.2023.18757","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article discusses the notion of moral damages in international investment arbitration. Although there are currently more than 2500 bilateral investment agreements (hereinafter — BIT) in force, none of them regulates moral damages. The analysis focuses on the historical background of moral damages, which shows that international law has not been overly concerned with their assessment within the last hundred years. As such, despite their almost universal acceptance by international courts and tribunals, there is still no guidance for tribunals on how to approach moral damages, making their assessment a topical issue of modern international law. The article highlights the reasons tribunals give for either completely disregarding such claims, or granting merely symbolic sums, such as non-tangible nature of moral damages, lack of any concrete evidence, or an extremely high threshold. The author concludes that international law still lacks a strict and uniform test, when it comes to moral damages, which are bound to face rather broad and subjective decisions rendered by the tribunals. The author further discusses the problem of assessing moral damages, which also lacks established methodology, and often refers to national law of domestic legal systems instead of a unified standard. In some cases, tribunals do not provide any reasoning or legal basis for their assessment. The author concludes that in the absence of a strict test, investment tribunals may turn to human rights instruments to make the assessment of moral damages clearer and more consistent.
国际投资法中的精神损害赔偿
本文讨论国际投资仲裁中的精神损害赔偿概念。尽管目前有效的双边投资协定(以下简称 BIT)超过 2500 个,但没有一个协定对精神损害作出规定。分析的重点是精神损害赔偿的历史背景,它表明在过去的一百年中,国际法并不过分关注精神损害赔偿的评估。因此,尽管国际性法院和法庭几乎普遍接受精神损害赔偿,但在如何处理精神损害赔偿问题上仍未为法庭提供指导,这使得对精神损害赔偿的评估成为现代国际法的一个热点问题。文章强调了法庭对此类索赔完全不予考虑或仅给予象征性赔偿的理由,如精神损害赔偿的非物质性、缺乏任何具体证据或门槛极高。作者的结论是,在精神损害赔偿问题上,国际法仍然缺乏严格统一的检验标准,法庭必然会做出相当宽泛和主观的裁决。作者进一步讨论了精神损害赔偿的评估问题,该问题也缺乏既定的方法,往往参照国内法律体系的国内法,而不是统一的标准。在某些情况下,法庭没有为其评估提供任何推理或法律依据。作者的结论是,在缺乏严格检验标准的情况下,投资法庭可以求助于人权文书,使精神损害赔偿的评估更加明确和一致。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信