No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Emerging Investment Treaty Arbitration Practice in China
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 March 2019
Extract
Historically speaking, the Asia-Pacific region has contributed to the evolution of the investment treaty arbitration practice. However, the case number involving this region remains low when compared with the strong growth of investment treaty arbitration worldwide. The region's role is disproportionate to its prominence in the world economy or its extensive network of investment treaty agreements (IIAs).
- Type
- International Arbitration in the Asia-Pacific: Prospects and Challenges of a Dynamic and Growing Field
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © by The American Society of International Law 2019
References
1 See Tza Yap Shum v. Republic of Peru (Tza Yap Shum v. Peru), ICSID Case No. ARB/07/6.
2 See Sanum Investments Limited v. Lao People's Democratic Republic (Sanum v. Laos), UNCITRAL (the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law), PCA Case No. 2013–13.
3 See Beijing Urban Construction Group Co. Ltd. v. Republic of Yemen (Beijing Urban Construction v. Yemen), ICSID Case No. ARB/14/30.
4 See Beijing Shougang Mining Investment Company Ltd., China Heilongjiang International Economic & Technical Cooperative Corp., and Qinhuangdaoshi Qinlong International Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Mongolia (Beijing Shougang and Others v. Mongolia), PCA Case No. 2010–20.
5 See Ansung Housing Co., Ltd. v. People's Republic of China (Ansung v. China), ICSID Case No. ARB/14/25.