Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-2h6rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-27T01:25:38.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

China's Treaty Policy and Practice in International Investment Law and Arbitration: A Comparative and Analytical Study by G. Matteo VACCARO-INCISA. Nijhoff International Investment Law Series. Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2021. xxi + 415 pp. Hardcover: €121.00/US$146.00; eBook (pdf): €125.00/US$150.00. doi: 10.1163/9789004443938

Review products

China's Treaty Policy and Practice in International Investment Law and Arbitration: A Comparative and Analytical Study by G. Matteo VACCARO-INCISA. Nijhoff International Investment Law Series. Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2021. xxi + 415 pp. Hardcover: €121.00/US$146.00; eBook (pdf): €125.00/US$150.00. doi: 10.1163/9789004443938

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2022

Nelson GOH  and
James NEWTON
Nelson GOH
Affiliation:
Pallas Partners LLP, London, UK
James NEWTON
Affiliation:
Pallas Partners LLP, London, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Asian Journal of International Law , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , July 2022 , pp. 426 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Asian Society of International Law

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Huawei v. Sweden (ICSID Case No. ARB/22/2); Qiong Ye and Jianping Yang v. Cambodia (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/42); Alpene v. Malta (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/36); Fengzhen Min v. Korea (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/26); Wang Jiazhu v. Finland (UNCITRAL, 2021); Beijing Everyway Traffic and Lighting Co Ltd v. Republic of Ghana (UNCITRAL, 2021); and, Wang & ors v. Ukraine (Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2020).

2 See Jetion and T-Hertz v. Greece (UNCITRAL, 2019); Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment v. Nigeria (UNCITRAL, 2018); Sanum Investments v. Laos (ICSID Case No. ADHOC/17/1); Beijing Urban Construction v. Yemen (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/30); Ping An Life Insurance v. Belgium (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/29); Beijing Shougang & ors v. Mongolia (PCA Case No. 2010-20); and, Tza Yap Shum v. Peru (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/6).

3 “Panel of Chinese law firms to advise state on treaty disputes” Global Arbitration Review (20 January 2022), online: Global Arbitration Review https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/panel-of-chinese-law-firms-advise-state-treaty-disputes.

4 “Beijing centre gears up for investment disputes” Global Arbitration Review (9 February 2022), online: Global Arbitration Review https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/beijing-centre-gears-investment-disputes.