Justice bubbles for the privileged: a critique of the investor-state dispute settlement proposals for the EU's investment agreements

被引：14
作者：
Vastardis, Anil Yilmaz [1 ,2 ]
机构：
[1] Univ Essex, Sch Law, Colchester, Essex, England
[2] Univ Essex, Human Rights Ctr, Colchester, Essex, England
来源：
LONDON REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LAW | 2018年 / 6卷 / 02期
关键词：
D O I：
10.1093/lril/lry020
中图分类号：
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号：
0301 ;
摘要：
This article criticises the judicialisation of investor state dispute settlement in the direction envisaged by the EU's Investment Court System because it prioritises institutions of justice for foreign investors over the improvement of local institutions that could provide justice for members across society, including foreign investors.
引用
收藏
页码：279 / 297
页数：19
相关论文
共 65 条
[11]  
Dolzer R, 2005, NYU J INT LAW POLITI, V37, P952
[12]   Access to Justice, Denial of Justice and International Investment Law [J].
Francioni, Francesco .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 2009, 20 (03) :729-747
[13]  
Franck Susan, 2007, PAC MCGEORGE GLOBAL, V19, P337
[14]  
Franck SD, 2009, HARVARD INT LAW J, V50, P435
[15]  
Franck Susan D., 2007, MCGEORGE GLOBAL BUSI, V19, P343
[16]   International substitutes for domestic institutions: Bilateral investment treaties and governance [J].
Ginsburg, T .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF LAW AND ECONOMICS, 2005, 25 (01) :107-123
[17]  
Ginsburg T, 2005, INT REV LAW ECON, V25, P22
[18]  
Guthrie BJ, 2013, N Y U J INT LAW POLI, V45, P1151
[19]  
Howse R, COUNTING CRITICS INV
[20]  
Johnsen JT, 2009, ACCESS JUSTICE JUDIC
1234567