The strengths of international investment law - above all, a strong focus on investor interests and an effective adjudication and enforcement system - also entail its weaknesses: it runs the danger of impeding or even sanctioning the host states' legitimate regulatory interests and ignoring other fields of public international law. How does it cope with public interest concerns such as human rights, the environment or the fight against corruption? At the heart of this book lies a fresh approach towards a general theory of such global public interest considerations in the investment realm. Delineating how and why those considerations matter, and why the current system does not accommodate them properly, Andreas Kulick fleshes out general principles and customary international law as defences the host state may raise against alleged investor rights infringements and promotes proportionality as the appropriate balancing mechanism.

Are conflicts between the ‘old capitalists’ and ‘new money’ manifest in today’s economy? Are investment treaties, which have traditionally been used to protect capital exporting states, now beginning to cause unwelcome side effects for them? International investment law has long been held as an economic and political instrument in the regime of international investment, with international investment treaties having been concluded to protect foreign investment and investors for a substantial period of time. However, the emerging new economic powers from the Third World are causing this to change. Taking the unique perspective of environmental protection in host states against states’ obligations to protect and promote foreign investments under the existing international investment treaty practice and dispute settlement practices, this book examines this inescapable conflict. This is the first major work in this field to interpret investment treaty provisions by introducing environmental reflection. It offers proposals for rethinking and reshaping the current pro-investor international investment law through taking up broad environmental exceptions.

Due to the ongoing recent expansion of public interest issues worldwide, the state’s right to regulate has been recaptured as a prominent concept in international investment law. The fair and equitable treatment (FET) standard provision in the text of an international investment agreement (IIA) has become a detailed clause clarifying the specific obligations of a state towards an investor under the FET standard. However, striking the right balance between the interests of host states and investors in these new treaty formulations has proved to be challenging. This book greatly clarifies the field by offering the in-depth analysis of the application of the state’s right to regulate in relation to FET standard provisions in IIAs and to decisions by arbitral tribunals in FET cases. Recognising that the role of tribunals is to balance the state’s public interests and the interests of the investor when interpreting and applying the FET standard, the author pursues such seminal issues and topics as the following: the legitimacy of the objective of the state’s measure; obligations and responsibilities of investors towards a host state; the nature and impact of a change to a national regulatory framework; special economic and sociopolitical circumstances in a host state; and due diligence and risk assessment as a condition for the protection of an investor’s legitimate expectations. Multiple IIAs concluded by the OECD Member States, as well by Russia and China between the developing countries, and the prominent investment law cases on the FET standard are examined in detail. The analysis pays particular attention to how investment jurisprudence in FET cases has been reflected in such new IIAs as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between the European Union (EU) and Canada (CETA), the EU-Vietnam FTA and the EU-Singapore FTA. These case studies demonstrate the evolution of the IIAs’ FET standard provisions and how they balance the application of the FET standard and the state’s right to regulate. Suggestions are provided for drafting formulations of the FET standard that can contribute to achieving such a balance. In the clear light it sheds on the legal conditions under which states may regulate in the public interest and its contribution to the reforms that are currently taking place in the field of international investment law, this book constitutes an exemplary framework to evaluate investment decisions on the FET standard and the right to regulate. It is sure to prove extremely useful for practitioners who work on investment cases, policymakers involved in negotiating and drafting of IIAs, policy advisors of governmental and non-governmental organisations and academics in international investment law.

This in-depth commentary analyses the new UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration.

This open access book focuses on public actors with a role in the settlement of investment disputes. Traditional studies on actors in international investment law have tended to concentrate on arbitrators, claimant investors and respondent states. Yet this focus on the "principal" players in investment dispute settlement has allowed a number of other seminal actors to be neglected. This book seeks to redress this imbalance by turning the spotlight on the latter. From the investor's home state to domestic courts, from sub-national governments to international organisations, and from political risk insurance agencies to legal defence teams in national ministries, the book critically reviews these overlooked public actors in international investment law.

Analyses bilateral treaties and regional agreements on foreign investments, focussing particularly on measures taken in the context of economic crises.

International investment law is one of fastest-growing areas of international law, but it is plagued by the vagueness of many investors' rights and unpredictable investment tribunal decisions. This books analyses international investment law through the lens of comparative public law to clarify investment treaty obligations and arbitral procedure.