Wildy & Sons Ltd — The World’s Legal Bookshop Search Results for isbn: '9789004288195'

Book of the Month

Borderlines in Private Law

Edited by: William Day, Julius Grower

Price: £90.00

Buy

More Information

Lord Denning: Life, Law and Legacy

Welcome to Wildys

Watch

NEW EDITION
The Law of Rights of Light 2nd ed

Jonathan Karas

Offers for Newly Called Barristers & Students

Special Discounts for Newly Called & Students

Secondhand & Out of Print

Browse Secondhand Online

A Nascent Common Law: The Process of Decisionmaking in International Legal Disputes between States and Foreign Investors

Frederic Gilles Sourgens

ISBN13: 9789004288195

Published: December 2014

Publisher: Brill Nijhoff

Country of Publication: The Netherlands

Format: Hardback

Price: £188.00

Convert Currency

Buy

Despatched in 11 to 13 days.

In A Nascent Common Law: The Process of Decisionmaking in International Legal Disputes Between States and Foreign Investors Frédéric Gilles Sourgens submits that investor-state dispute resolution relies upon an inductive, common law decisionmaking process, which reveals a necessary plurality of first principles within investor-state dispute resolution. Relying upon, amongst others, Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, the book explains how this plurality of first principles does not devolve into arbitrary indeterminacy.

A Nascent Common Law provides an alternative account to current theoretical conceptions of investor-state arbitration. It explains that these theories cannot adequately resolve a key empirical challenge: tribunals frequently reach facially inconsistent results on similar questions of law. Sourgens makes an inductive approach, focused on the manner of decisionmaking by tribunals in the context of specific records that can explain this inconsistency.

Subjects:: International Investment Law, Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution

Contents:: PART 1: THE FRAMEWORK OF INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION; CHAPTER 1; CRITICAL MASS: THE UNIQUE ROLE OF INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW; 1.1 Quantitative Explanation; 1.2 Qualitative Explanation; 1.3 Functional Explanation; 1.4 Consequence of Doctrinal Divergence; 1.5 Method; CHAPTER 2; THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF THE ADJUDICATORY FRAMEWORK; 2.1 Beneath the Contract Law Analogy; 2.1.1 The Imperfections of the Contract Law Analogy; 2.1.2 The Virtues of the Contract Law Analogy; 2.2 Beneath the Treaty Analogy; 2.2.1 The Imperfections of the Treaty Analogy; 2.2.2 The Virtues of the Treaty Analogy; 2.3 Reconstructing Investor-State Arbitration Through Unilateral Acts; CHAPTER 3; STABILITY OF THE ADJUDICATORY FRAMEWORK; 3.1 The Offer and Acceptance Analogy and Denunciation of the ICSID Convention; 3.2 The Offer and Acceptance Analogy and the Termination of Standing Consent Instruments; 3.3 Denunciation and Modification Under the Treaty Analogy; 3.4 Denunciation and Modification of Consents to Arbitration under the Unilateral Act Model; 3.5 Implications for the Process of Decisionmaking; CHAPTER 4; IURA NOVIT CURIA; 4.1 Beneath Iura Novit Curia; 4.1.1 The Problems of Applying Iura Novit Curia in Investor-State Arbitration; 4.1.2 The Virtues of Iura Novit Curia; 4.2 Beneath the Terms of Reference; 4.2.1 The Problems of Limiting Applicable Law to the Pleadings; 4.2.2 The Virtues of Limiting Applicable Law to the Pleadings; 4.3 Reconstructing Iura Novit Curia as Urteilskraft; PART 2: ESTABLISHING JURISDICTION IN INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION; CHAPTER 5; THE PROBLEM OF JURISDICTIONAL JUDGMENT; 5.1 Burdens of Proof and Persuasion in Establishing Jurisdiction; 5.1.1 Existence and Scope of Consent; 5.1.2 Jurisdictional Facts; 5.2 The Shortcomings of Use of Burdens of Proof and Persuasion in the Jurisdictional Context; 5.3 Ex Officio Establishment of Jurisdiction; 5.4 The Shortcomings of Jurisdictional Decisionmaking Ex Officio; 5.5 Preliminary Reconciliation; CHAPTER 6; PROOF OF CONSENT; 6.1 The Function of Jurisdiction in International Law – Factory at Chorzów; 6.2 Application of the Factory at Chorzów Approach in Investor-State Arbitrations; 6.3 The Process of Jurisdictional Proof of Consent in Investor-State Arbitration; 6.4 Investor Reliance and Interpretation of Consent Instruments; 6.5 Clarity Presumptions Are Inconsistent with the Factory at Chorzów Approach; 6.6 Reevaluating Jurisdictional Decisions in Light of the Proof of Law; CHAPTER 7; ESTABLISHMENT OF JURISDICTIONAL FACTS; 7.1 A Level Playing Field—Proof of Jurisdictional Facts Before the International Court of Justice; 7.2 The Practice of Investment Tribunals; 7.3 De Facto Burdens of Production; 7.4 Burden of Production and Factual Presumptions; 7.5 Dispositive Use of Burdens Revisited; CHAPTER 8; THE INDUCTIVE PROCESS OF JURISDICTIONAL DECISIONMAKING; 8.1 Jurisdictional Balancing as Exercise of Independent Judgment; 8.2 Jurisdictional Balancing and the Nature of Consent; 8.3 The Inductive Triangulation of Jurisdictional Equilibrium Points; PART 3: DEVELOPING INVESTMENT PROTECTION AS COMMON LAW; CHAPTER 9; THE PRECEDENT PROBLEM; 9.1 Investor-State Awards as Evincing Customary International Law; 9.2 Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle – The Alleged Illegtimacy of BIT Arbitrations; 9.3 Grand Bargains and Self-Contained Regimes; 9.4 The Critical Knot; CHAPTER 10; LAW AS PROCESS; 10.1 Reliance upon Earlier Decisions in the Investor-State Arbitral Process; 10.2 Divergence of Investor-State Arbitral Awards; 10.2.1 The Argentine Cases; 10.2.2 The NAFTA Cases; 10.2.3 CME/Lauder Cases; 10.2.4 The SGS Cases; 10.3 Conclusion; CHAPTER 11; THE COMMON LAW SOLUTION; 11.1 Civil Law System and Common Law Process; 11.2 Investor-State Arbitration as Common Law; 11.3 Law in Multiple Dimensions; 11.4 Resolving the Problems of the Prevalent Approaches; 11.5 Prior Decisions as Persuasive Precedent; 11.6 Legitimacy Restored: The Virtue of Divergence; PART 4: CONCLUSION; CHAPTER 12; LE PLUS ÇA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MÊME CHOSE; 12.1 Independent Judgment; 12.2 The Inductive, Synthetic Nature of Judgment; 12.3 Judgment and the Transnational Legal Process; 12.4 Autopoiesis Revisited