...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of International Economic Law >Environmental and Human Rights Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration: at the Crossroads of Domestic and International Law
【24h】

Environmental and Human Rights Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration: at the Crossroads of Domestic and International Law

机译：国际投资仲裁中的环境和人权反对者：在国内外法律的十字路口

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Recently, environmental and human rights (EHR) counterclaims in investment arbitration have attracted much attention as a vehicle to recalibrate the investor-state relationship. However, until now, successful instances of EHR counterclaims have been admittedly rare. As explained in this paper, some of the major barriers to EHR counterclaims in investment arbitration, and some of the concerns associated with them, are rooted in the domestic law basis of such counterclaims. Contrary to the position of several commentators, this paper argues that the grounding of EHR counterclaims on international law is neither practical nor beneficial, and EHR counterclaims are necessarily based on domestic law. Therefore, when investment arbitral tribunals adjudicate EHR counterclaims, they essentially act as an alternative to domestic courts. This has several implications. First, on questions of jurisdiction and admissibility of EHR counterclaims, decisions of states and arbitral tribunals essentially turn on the pros and cons of having these claims adjudicated by investment arbitral tribunals as opposed to domestic courts. Second, weaknesses in domestic rules, including the difficulty of holding shareholders accountable, would carry over to EHR counterclaims. Such problems can only be efficiently tackled at the level of domestic law. Third, as revealed from the inconsistent decisions in Perenco and Burlington on the merits of the environmental counterclaims, having investment arbitral tribunals adjudicate domestic law-based EHR counterclaims may cause certain concerns. For EHR counterclaims to play a more beneficial role, decision-makers must bear in mind these factors and concerns when taking their policy choices.
机译：最近，投资仲裁的环境和人权（EHR）反诉吸引了作为重新校准投资者状态关系的车辆的许多关注。然而，到目前为止，EHR反诉的成功实例已被罕见罕见。如本文所解释的，对投资仲裁的EHR反诉的一些主要障碍以及与他们相关的一些疑虑，植根于此类反诉的国内法律。与若干评论员的立场相反，本文认为，关于国际法的EHR反诉的接地既不是实用性也不是有益，而EHR反诉必然基于国内法。因此，当投资仲裁庭裁定EHR反诉时，他们基本上是国内法院的替代品。这有几种影响。首先，关于审理法庭的司法管辖区和可受理的问题，仲裁庭的决定基本上就投资仲裁庭裁定了这些索赔的优缺点，而不是国内法院。其次，国内规则的弱点，包括持有股东责任的难度，将载入EHR反诉。这些问题只能有效地解决了国内法的水平。第三，正如Perenco和Burlington在环境反对者的优点中透露的那样，投资仲裁庭裁定国内律法的EHR反诉可能会导致某些问题。对于ehr反对者发挥更有益的作用，决策者必须牢记这些因素和担心他们的政策选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号