投资仲裁联合解释的“外部性”:前瞻之鉴

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
Chen Yu
{"title":"投资仲裁联合解释的“外部性”:前瞻之鉴","authors":"Chen Yu","doi":"10.1163/15718034-bja10089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe joint interpretation mechanism is gaining increasing attention in the recent practice and study of international investment law. In the past, the NAFTA Free Trade Commission exercised this interpretative authority by issuing the controversial Notes of Interpretation which limit the scope of fair and equitable treatment (FET) to customary international law. While much has been debated about the legitimacy of the Notes in the context of NAFTA arbitration, this article examines its influence on tribunals not bound by it (i.e. non-NAFTA tribunals). An extensive review of cases shows that non-NAFTA tribunals are generally cautious about directly applying the Notes to their own interpretation, while some followed NAFTA precedents shaped by the Notes. Considering the possible proliferation of the joint interpretation mechanism in the future, this article further examines the role of third states’ joint interpretations in treaty interpretation through the lens of Articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT.","PeriodicalId":42613,"journal":{"name":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “Externalities” of Joint Interpretations in Investment Arbitration: Learning from the Past\",\"authors\":\"Chen Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718034-bja10089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe joint interpretation mechanism is gaining increasing attention in the recent practice and study of international investment law. In the past, the NAFTA Free Trade Commission exercised this interpretative authority by issuing the controversial Notes of Interpretation which limit the scope of fair and equitable treatment (FET) to customary international law. While much has been debated about the legitimacy of the Notes in the context of NAFTA arbitration, this article examines its influence on tribunals not bound by it (i.e. non-NAFTA tribunals). An extensive review of cases shows that non-NAFTA tribunals are generally cautious about directly applying the Notes to their own interpretation, while some followed NAFTA precedents shaped by the Notes. Considering the possible proliferation of the joint interpretation mechanism in the future, this article further examines the role of third states’ joint interpretations in treaty interpretation through the lens of Articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-bja10089\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-bja10089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在最近的国际投资法实践和研究中,共同解释机制越来越受到关注。过去,北美自由贸易协定自由贸易委员会通过发布有争议的《解释说明》行使这一解释权,将公平与公平待遇的范围限制在习惯国际法上。虽然关于《说明》在北美自由贸易协定仲裁中的合法性存在很多争论,但本文审查了《说明》对不受其约束的法庭(即非北美自由贸易协定法庭)的影响。对案件的广泛审查表明,非《北美自由贸易协定》法庭一般对直接将《说明》适用于它们自己的解释持谨慎态度,而有些法庭则遵循《说明》形成的《北美自由贸易协定》先例。考虑到联合解释机制在未来可能会扩散,本文通过《公约》第31条和第32条的视角进一步考察了第三国联合解释在条约解释中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The “Externalities” of Joint Interpretations in Investment Arbitration: Learning from the Past
The joint interpretation mechanism is gaining increasing attention in the recent practice and study of international investment law. In the past, the NAFTA Free Trade Commission exercised this interpretative authority by issuing the controversial Notes of Interpretation which limit the scope of fair and equitable treatment (FET) to customary international law. While much has been debated about the legitimacy of the Notes in the context of NAFTA arbitration, this article examines its influence on tribunals not bound by it (i.e. non-NAFTA tribunals). An extensive review of cases shows that non-NAFTA tribunals are generally cautious about directly applying the Notes to their own interpretation, while some followed NAFTA precedents shaped by the Notes. Considering the possible proliferation of the joint interpretation mechanism in the future, this article further examines the role of third states’ joint interpretations in treaty interpretation through the lens of Articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
40.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals is firmly established as the leading journal in its field. Each issue will give you the latest developments with respect to the preparation, adoption, suspension, amendment and revision of Rules of Procedure as well as statutory and internal rules and other related matters. The Journal will also provide you with the latest practice with respect to the interpretation and application of rules of procedure and constitutional documents, which can be found in judgments, advisory opinions, written and oral pleadings as well as legal literature.
×
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