KEY CHARACTERISTICS AND ELEMENTS OF INTERRELATION OF THE MAIN STANDARDS OF ATTITUDE TO FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL LAW | ECONOMIC THEORY AND LAW

KEY CHARACTERISTICS AND ELEMENTS OF INTERRELATION OF THE MAIN STANDARDS OF ATTITUDE TO FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Author	Cherepovskyi K. V., PhD student at the Department of International Law, Ukraine, Kyiv
In heading	Law;
Signed print	22.12.2023	Issues number	2023-№4 (55)	Page	73-94
Type of articles	Scientific article	Code UDK	341.1/8;341:63	ISSN print	2411-5584
Abstract	Problem setting. Legal regimes governing international investment or, in another words, investment treatments are the international guarantees, which comes out of the obligations of states on the attitude to mutual investments, – form the construct of investment treatments, establishing the basic rules of attitude to investments from abroad within the geographical spaces of states or their jurisdictions. By introducing important exceptions and additions to acts of national law, such international guarantees, from the one hand, equip a foreign investor with fairly powerful international legal toolkit, and, from another, define and consolidate the features of unified interstate investment treatment. Comparison of characteristics and identification of elements of the ratio of standards of attitude to foreign investments, thus, appear to be relevant research directions for the field of international investment law both in the doctrinal context and in the scientific and practical context. Recent research and publication analysis. The problem of price competition is of interest to many domestic and foreign scientists. Among them: R. Dolzer and C. Schreuer; S. W. Schill; R. Kläger; C. Yannaca-Small; R. P. Boychuk; I. Y. Matiushenko; O. V. Pashchenko; V. V. Poiedynok; D. V. Skrynka; V. D. Chernadchuk, V. V. Sukhonos, and T. O. Chernadchuk; S. O. Shemshuchenko, and others. The purpose of the article is to reveal of the intermediate results of the dissertation research on the standards of attitude towards foreign investments from the perspective of their correlation and comparison with the standard of a fair and equal regime. Paper main body. The author analyzes the key elements of modern international investment law system from standpoint of standards of treatment of foreign investments, which are recognized through decisions of authoritative international arbitrations, courts as well as generally. Being within their jurisprudence nature legal regimes of the implementation of international investment activities, these standards of foreign investments treatment play the role of customary criterions for compliance of state’s behavior with its international obligations, which from legal point of view outline the main parameters of attitude to foreign investments in countries, making important additions and (or) exceptions to acts of national law. A description of the key characteristics and properties of the main standards of treatment of foreign investments is provided. Among these international standards analyzed: the national treatment and the most favored nation treatment, the fair and equitable treatment, the standard of full protection and security, the standard of prohibition of illegal expropriation; and the standard of protection against unjustified or discriminatory actions. Attention is also paid to aspects of correlation and combination of the considered international standards of foreign investments treatment; issues of integration of international investment law with international trade law. The contribution of each of the main standards of protection of foreign investments within creation of features of single and largely unified international investment legal regime has been separately considered and analyzed. Quotations from decisions of international investment arbitrations and courts regarding foreign investments are provided as a such, which helps to clarify or accurately convey legal nature of each international standards of investments treatment. Conclusions. As the main conclusion, it is noted that during the investment and business planning of the cross-border development of an enterprise today it is possible not to take into account the factors arising from the processes of establishing and forming global standards of attitude towards foreign investments. Covering issues of property rights, exercise of authority and justice, other important aspects for international investment activities, relevant standards of protection of foreign investments serve as effective means of compensation for losses of foreign investors. Each of these standards of attitude towards foreign investments provide specific advantages, opening wider gates for protecting international investors’ rights and interests based on existing arbitrating practices, national law specific and relating international law norms as well as other standards. Short abstract for an article Abstract. This article analyzes the key elements of structure of modern international investment law from standpoint of standards of treatment of foreign investments, which are recognized through decisions of authoritative international arbitrations, courts as well as generally. Descriptions of the key characteristics and properties of the main standards of treatment of foreign investments is provided. Attention is paid to aspects of correlation and combination of the considered international standards of foreign investments treatment; issues of integration of international investment law with international trade law. The contribution of each of the main standards of protection of foreign investments within creation of features of single and largely unified international investment legal regime has been separately considered and analyzed.
Keywords	investment treatment, fair and equitable treatment, unified international investment treatment, international investment agreements, bilateral investment treaties.
Reviewer
External reviewer
Article in PDF	73-94
Bibliography	1. Dolzer, R., & Schreuer, C. (2008). Principles of international investment law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2. Shyll, S. V. (2012). Mezhdunarodnoe pravo zashchyty unvestytsyi i sravnytelnoe publychnoe pravo: osnovanyia y metody publychno-pravovoi modely ynvestytsyonnoho arbytrazhnoho sudoproyzvodstva [Definition of foreign investors and investments subject to protection: International and comparative law aspects]. Daydzhest Publichnogo Prava – Public Law Digest, 1, 71–123. https://dpp.mpil.de/01_2012/art1_3.cfm [in Russian]. 3. Kläger, R. (2013). ‘Fair and equitable treatment’ in international investment law. Cambridge University Press. 4. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2004). Fair and equitable treatment standard in international investment law (OECD Working Papers on International Investment, No. 2004/03). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/675702255435 5. Boychuk, R. P. (2019, May 17). Problemy formuvannia “spravedlyvoho rezhymu” i “bezpeky” inozemnykh investytsii v pravi Ukrainy [Problems of formation of “just regime” and “safety” of foreign investments in the law of Ukraine]. In Ekonomikopravovi problemy rozvytku ta spryiannia gospodarskii diialnosti v suchasnykh umovakh [Economic and legal problems of development and promotion of economic activity in modern conditions] (pp. 73–78). NDI PZIR NAPrN Ukrainy [in Ukrainian]. 6. Matiushenko, I. Yu. (2014). Mizhnarodnyi investytsiinyi menedzhment [International investment management]. Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics [in Ukrainian]. 7. Pashchenko, O. V. (2015). Mizhnarodni investytsiini rezhymy u rehionalnykh torhovelnykh uhodakh [International investment regimes in regional trade agreements]. Visnyk Dnipropetrovskoho universytetu. Seriia “Svitove hospodarstvo i mizhnarodni ekonomichni vidnosyny” – Bulletin of Dnipropetrovsk University. Series “World economy and international economic relations”, 7, 58–64 [in Ukrainian]. 8. Poiedynok, V. V. (2014). Pravovi rezhymy mizhnarodnoi torhivli ta investytsii: vidminnosti, zblyzhennia, implikatsii dlia natsionalnoho zakonodavtsia [Legal regimes of international trade and investment: differences, convergence, implications for the national legislator]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia: Pravo – Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law, 28(1), 186–189 [in Ukrainian]. 9. Skrynka, D. V. (2010). Pravo Svitovoi orhanizatsii torhivli [Law of the World Trade Organization]. Promeni [in Ukrainian]. 10. Chernadchuk, V. D., Sukhonos, V. V., & Chernadchuk, T. O. (2005). Investytsiine pravo Ukrainy [Investment law of Ukraine]. Universytetska knyha; Kniahynia Olha [in Ukrainian]. 11. Shemshuchenko, S. O. (2014). Zakhyst inozemnykh investytsii: mizhnarodno-pravovi standarty [Protection of foreign investments: International legal standards]. Yurydycha dumka [in Ukrainian]. 12. Mytsyk, V. V., Buromenskyi, M. V., & Hnatovskyi, M. M. (2020). Mizhnarodne publichne parvo [International public law] (Vol. 2). Pravo [in Ukrainian]. 13. Ministerial Declaration: Adopted on 14 November 2001 on World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference, Fourth Session. Doha, 9–14 November 2001: WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, 20 November 2001. https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=Q:/WT/Min01/DEC1.pdf&Open=True 14. Atabaev, A. (2012, April 20). Rezhym spravedlivogo i ravnopravnogo otnoshenija kak rasshyrennyi standart v mezhdunarodnom investitsionnom prave [Fair and equitable treatment regime as an expanded standard in international investment law]. In Aktual’nye voprosy i analiz praktiki primenenija zakonodatel’stva v neftegazovoj otrasli Respubliki Kazahstan [Current issues and analysis of the practice of applying legislation in the oil and gas industry of the Republic of Kazakhstan]. https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=31509376 [in Russian]. 15. Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. The Republic of Ecuador, Final Award, LCIA Case No. UN3467, July 1, 2004. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0571.pdf 16. Parkerings-Compagniet v. Republic of Lithuania, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/05/8, September 11, 2007. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0619.pdf 17. Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments: Adopted on April 6, 1989. https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/details/853 18. RosInvestCo UK Ltd. v. The Russian Federation, Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, Award on Jurisdiction, SCC Case No. V079/2005, October 2007. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0719.pdf 19. Bronfman, M. K. (2006). Fair and equitable treatment: An evolving standard. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online, 10(1), 609–680. https://doi.org/10.1163/187574106X00146 20. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, Award of PCA, PCA Case No. 2015-40, March 29, 2019. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/casedocuments/italaw11341.pdf 21. PSEG Global Inc. and Konya Ilgin Elektrik Üretim ve Ticaret Limited Sirketi v. Republic of Turkey, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/02/5, January 19, 2007. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0695.pdf 22. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2004). International investment agreements: key issues (UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/2004/10, Vol. I). https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/iteiit200410_en.pdf 23. Agreement between Ukraine and the United States of America on the promotion and mutual protection of investments: Ratified by Law of Ukraine on October 21, 1994. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/840_419 24. Agreement to the Energy Charter dated December 17, 1994 and the Final Act to it. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_056 25. Saluka Investments B. V. (The Netherlands) v. The Czech Republic, Permanent Court of Arbitration Partial Award, March 17, 2006. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0740.pdf 26. Wena Hotels Ltd. v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/98/4, December 8, 2000. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0902.pdf 27. Azurix corp. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/01/12, July 14, 2006. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0065.pdf 28. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2012). Expropriation. UNCTAD Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements II (UNCTAD/DIAE/IA/2011/7). https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/unctaddiaeia2011d7_en.pdf 29. The U. S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). (2020). https://ustr.gov/tradeagreements/free-trade-agreements/united-states-mexico-canada-agreement/agreementbetween 30. ADC Affiliate Limited and ADC & ADMC Management Limited v. Hungary, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/03/16, October ,2 2006. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0006.pdf 31. Gami Investments Inc. v. Mexico, UNCITRAL Award, November 15, 2004. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0353_0.pdf 32. Metalclad Corporation v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1, August 30, 2000. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0510.pdf 33. Case of James and Others v. The United Kingdom, Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 8793/79, Judgment of February 21, 1986. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/tur?i=001-57507 34. Case Concerning Electronica Sicula S. P. A. (ELSI) (United States of America v. Italy), Judgment of International Court of Justice, July 20, 1989. https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/76/076-19890720-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf 35. CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/01/8, May 12, 2005. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0184.pdf 36. Enron Creditors Recovery Corporation (formerly Enron Corporation) and Ponderosa Assets, L. P. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Award, Case No. ARB/01/3, May 22, 2007. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0293.pdf 37. LG&E Energy Corp., LG&E Capital Corp., and LG&E International, Inc. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Decision on Liability, Case No. ARB/02/1, October 3, 2006. https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0462.pdf
Code DOI	https://doi.org/10.31359/2411-5584-2023-55-4-73

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons –Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

22.12.2023