investment arbitration

174 Pages·2016·2.49 MB·English

management 2008 - 2016 • DIegO gaRCÍa CaRRIÓn 1
A CRITICAL VIEW
OF INVESTMENT
ARBITRATION BASED
ON ECUADORIAN EXPERIENCE
• M A N A G E M E N T 2 0 0 8 - 2 0 1 6 • D I E G O G A R C Í A C A R R I Ó N

FOR THE LEGAL DEFENSE OF
THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR

A CRITICAL VIEW
OF INVESTMENT
ARBITRATION BASED
ON ECUADORIAN EXPERIENCE
• M A N A G E M E N T 2 0 0 8 - 2 0 1 6 • D I E G O G A R C Í A C A R R I Ó N
This edition is a product of the Attorney General’s
Office, directed and supervised by Dr. Diego García
Carrión, Attorney General, coordinated by Dra. Blanca
Gomez de la Torre, Director of International Affairs and
National Arbitration and Dra. Christel Gaibor, Deputy
Director of International Affairs, with the support of the
legal team of the Department of International Affairs
and Arbitration.
Quito, August 2016
management 2008 - 2016 • DIegO gaRCÍa CaRRIÓn 7
T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s
CHAPTER I
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The investor-State dispute resolution mechanism 17
1.2 Historical development 21
1.3 International Investment Law 26
CHAPTER II
2 INTeRNaTIONal INvesTmeNT agReemeNTs (IIas)
2.1 Historical development 31
2.1.1 Era of Infancy (end of the Second World War until mid-1960s) 35
2.1.2 Era of Dichotomy (mid-1960s until mid-1980s) 36
2.1.3 Era of Proliferation (1990’s until 2007) 37
2.1.4 Era of Reorientation (2008 through present) 40
2.2 New Trends 45
2.2.1 IIA’s And Sustainable Development 45
2.2.2 Greater Accuracy In The Definition of Investment. – 47
2.2.3 Greater Accuracy In The Concepts Of Fair And Equitable Treatment, Full Security And
Protection, And Indirect Expropriation. – 48
2.2.4 Preservation Of States’ Right To Regulate By Limiting The Objectives Of Promotion And
Liberalization Of Investments 48
2.2.5 Greater Transparency Among The Parties In The Creation Of Domestic Laws 49
2.2.6 Dispute Resolution Mechanism Reform 49
2.2.7 Recent agreements 49
2.2.7.1 CETA Agreement 49
2.2.7.2 Transpacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement 50
2.2.7.3 EU- United States Transatlantil Trade and Investment Partnership 53
8 A criticAl view of investment ArbitrAtion bAsed on ecuAdoriAn experience
2.3 Model BITs 55
2.3.1 Estados Unidos 55
2.3.2 India 56
2.3.3 Brazil 56
2.3.4 Colombia 58
2.3.5 Belgium 58
2.4 Structure of the BIT 69
2.4.1 Preamble 61
2.4.2 Definitions 62
2.4.3 Investment Protection Standards 62
2.4.4 Dispute Resolution Rules 63
CHAPTER III
3 THe aPPlICaTION aND INTeRPReTaTION OF BIT’s aND IIa’s WITHIN
INvesTOR-sTaTe DIsPUTe ResOlUTION sYsTems: Ecuador’s experience
3.1 Treaty Interpretation and the Perspective of Arbitration Tribunals 65
3.2 Coverage of BITs and Definitions 74
3.2.1 Definition of Investment 75
3.2.1.1 Ecuador’s experience 82
3.3 Treatment and Protection Standards 96
3.3.1 Fair and Equitable Treatment 98
3.3.1.1 Denial of Justice 99
3.3.1.2 Ecuador’s experience 102
3.3.2 Expropriation 110
3.3.2.1 Ecuador’s experience 112
3.3.3 National Treatment 119
management 2008 - 2016 • DIegO gaRCÍa CaRRIÓn 9
3.3.3.1 Ecuador’s experience 120
3.3.4 The Umbrella Clause 120
3.3.4.1 Ecuador’s Experience 122
CHAPTER IV
4 CRITICIsms OF THe INvesTOR-sTaTe DIsPUTe ResOlUTION sYsTem-PROPOsals
4.1 Inconsistent Tribunal decisions 125
4.1.1 The inadequacy of the annulment action as a means to correct Tribunals’
inconsistent decisions 135
4.1.2 The appellate mechanism as a proposal to overcome an inconsistency. 143
4.2 Mechanisms with limited actors (Arbitrators that can be attorneys or experts) 151
4.2.1 Disqualification to ensure the impartiality of arbitration decisions 152
4.3 Elevated costs and excessive delays 155
4.3.1 Disparity of reasoning given a monetary judgment 156
4.4 Unlimited access to the dispute resolution system and / or arbitration 159
4.5 Comprehensive system reform 161
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKs aND JOURNals 165
aWaRDs, DeCIsIONs and JUDgmeNTs 167
TReaTIes 169
INTeRNeT sOURCes 169