{"title":"投资仲裁和最惠国的难题:从马费济尼到意大利的漫长曲折之路","authors":"U. Živković","doi":"10.5937/rkspp2102149z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interpretation of the most-favored nation clause in investment treaty arbitration has been sparking debates for the better part of two decades. The paper examines the issue from the perspective of two opposing ends-a broad stance of the seminal decision in Maffezini Case and a recent more restrictive approach undertaken by the arbitral tribunal in Içkale decision, in order to paint in broad strokes the outlines of a balancing act mechanism in interpretation that author puts forward.","PeriodicalId":236613,"journal":{"name":"Revija Kopaonicke skole prirodnog prava","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investment arbitration and the MFN conundrum: The long and winding road from Maffezini to Içkale\",\"authors\":\"U. Živković\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/rkspp2102149z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Interpretation of the most-favored nation clause in investment treaty arbitration has been sparking debates for the better part of two decades. The paper examines the issue from the perspective of two opposing ends-a broad stance of the seminal decision in Maffezini Case and a recent more restrictive approach undertaken by the arbitral tribunal in Içkale decision, in order to paint in broad strokes the outlines of a balancing act mechanism in interpretation that author puts forward.\",\"PeriodicalId\":236613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revija Kopaonicke skole prirodnog prava\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revija Kopaonicke skole prirodnog prava\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/rkspp2102149z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revija Kopaonicke skole prirodnog prava","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/rkspp2102149z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Investment arbitration and the MFN conundrum: The long and winding road from Maffezini to Içkale
Interpretation of the most-favored nation clause in investment treaty arbitration has been sparking debates for the better part of two decades. The paper examines the issue from the perspective of two opposing ends-a broad stance of the seminal decision in Maffezini Case and a recent more restrictive approach undertaken by the arbitral tribunal in Içkale decision, in order to paint in broad strokes the outlines of a balancing act mechanism in interpretation that author puts forward.