Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:02:24.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remarks by Rudolf Dolzer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Rudolf Dolzer
Rudolf Dolzer*
Affiliation:
Institut für Völkerrecht, University of Bonn
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
Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Law
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 100 , 2006 , pp. 69 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2006

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

* Mr. Feliciano and Ms. Menaker did not contribute written remarks.

1 Occidental Exploration and Prod. Co. v. Ecuador (UNCITRAL July 1, 2004). The tribunal stated:

The Tribunal is of the opinion that in the instant case the Treaty standard is not different from that required under international law concerning both the stability and predictability of the legal and business framework of the investment. to this extent, the Treaty standard can be equated with that under international law as evidenced by the opinions of the various tribunals cited above.

Id, para. 190.

2 CMS Gas Transmission Co. v. Argentina, ICSID No. ARB/01/8, 44 ILM 1205 (2005) (May 12, 2005). The tribunal observed:

While the choice between requiring a higher treaty standard and that of equating it with the international minimum standard might have relevance in the context of some disputes, the Tribunal is not persuaded that it is relevant in this case. in fact, the Treaty standard of fair and equitable treatment and its connection with the required stability and predictability of the business environment, founded on solemn legal and contractual commitments, is not different from the international law minimum standard and its evolution under customary law.

Id, para. 284.

3 Id., paras. 274, 276, 277.

4 Tecnicas Medioambientales Teemed, S.A. v. Mexico, ICSID No. ARB (AF)/00/2, 43 ILM 133 (2004), para. 154 (May 29, 2003).

5 Mondev Int’l v. United States, ICSID No. ARB(AF)/99/2, 42 ILM 85 (2003), para. 119 (Oct. 11, 2002).