The Influence of MFN Clause on International Investment Dispute Settlement Procedure to Investor's Home Country
International Journal of Law and Society
Volume 1, Issue 1, March 2018, Pages: 10-15
Received: Oct. 30, 2017; Accepted: Nov. 16, 2017; Published: Dec. 24, 2017
Views 1636      Downloads 119
Author
Hai Tian, Department of Law, Northwest University, Xi’an, China
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
The purpose of the MFN clause in the International Investment Treaty is to promote the interests of the parties, not to derogate from their interests. From the perspective of the investor's home country, the MFN clause to expand the international arbitration practice applicable to the international investment dispute settlement procedure has the advantages and disadvantages of the investor's home country, and the overall situation is more harm than good. Which will seriously affects the investor's home country's own understanding of the obligations under the investment treaty, and thus inevitably affect the investor's home country on their own contract in the international law of the legitimacy of the judgments and expectations.
Keywords
MFN Clause, Investment Dispute Settlement, Investor Home Country
To cite this article
Hai Tian, The Influence of MFN Clause on International Investment Dispute Settlement Procedure to Investor's Home Country, International Journal of Law and Society. Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018, pp. 10-15. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20180101.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Maffezini v. Spain, ICSID Case No. ABR/97/7. Decision on Objection to Jurisdiction of January 25, 2000. para. 58.
[2]
Zhu Mingxin: "The most-favored-nation treatment clause applies to the appearance and essence of the investment dispute settlement procedure - based on the perspective of treaty interpretation", "Law and business Studies", No. 3, 2015, p. 171.
[3]
Zheng Yubo: "Civil Law Debt Book", China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2004, pp. 358-359.
[4]
Shi Hui: "Criticism and Reconstruction of Investment Treaty Arbitration System", China Law Press, 2008, pp. 23-24.
[5]
Cai Congyan: "Commercialization of International Investment Arbitration and" Commercialization", "Modern Law Journal", No. 1, 2011, pp. 153-154.
[6]
Keohane, R. O. & A. Moravcsik & A. M. Slaughter, Legalized Dispute Resolution: Interstate and Transnational, International Organization, 54 (3), 2000. p. 485.
[7]
UNCTAD, Latest Development in Investor-State dispute settlement, IIA Monitor, No 1, New York and Geneva: United Nations, 2009. pp. 45-48.
[8]
Huang Shixi: "Application of MFN Clauses in International Investment Arbitration and New Development of Jurisdiction", Journal of Legal Science, Vol. 2, 2013, p. 812.
[9]
Chen An, Cai Congyan: "New Development of International Investment Law and New Practice of China's Bilateral Investment Treaty", Fudan University Press, 2007, p. 209.
[10]
Mondev International Ltd. v. United States of America, Award, http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3758.htm, last visited May. 18, 2017.
[11]
Susan D. Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in investment Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decision, Fordham Law Review, Vol. 73, 2005. p. 1525.
[12]
Liang Danni: A Study on the Application of the Most Interested Necessary Terms of the International Investment Treaty - An Analysis Based on Iraqi Lan Company v. China, "Journal of Legal Studies", Vol. 2, 2012, p. 101.
[13]
Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria, Decision on Jurisdiction. para. 207.
[14]
Weng Xiantao: "China Investment Protection Agreement Model (Draft) on the draft (1)", "International Journal of Economic Law," No. 4, 2011, p. 195.
[15]
Chen Xin: "Legal Interpretation of WTO Dispute Settlement - Judicial Restraintism and Judicial Activism", Peking University Press, 2010, p. 1.
[16]
Denise Manning Cabral, The Imminent Death of the Calvo Clause and the Rebirth of the Calvo Principle: Equality of Foreign and national Investors, Law and Policy in International Business, Vol. 26, 1995. p. 1198-1199.
[17]
Yannick Radi, the Application of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties: Domesticating the “Trojan Horse”, The European Journal of International Law, 2007, Vol. 18 No. 4. p. 11.
[18]
Schneiderman, D, Globalisation, Governance, and Investment Rules, in J. Glarke & G. R. Edwards, Global Governance in the Twenty-first Century, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. p. 68.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186