Environmental Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration

被引:16
作者
Scherer, Maxi [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bruce, Stuart [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Reschke, Juliane [5 ,6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Queen Mary Univ London, Law, London, England
[2] Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, Int Arbitrat Dispute Resolut & Energy Law, London, England
[3] Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, London, England
[4] KPMG, Climate Risk & Decarbonisat Strategy, London, England
[5] Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, Litigat Controversy Dept, London, England
[6] Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, Int Arbitrat Practice Grp, London, England
[7] Hogan Lovells, Litigat Arbitrat & Employment Practice Grp, Munich, Germany
关键词
LAW;
D O I
10.1093/icsidreview/siab006
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Through design of international investment agreements, foreign investors may bring international claims against the States in which they invest, challenging domestic executive and regulatory measures, including those related to the environment and sustainable development. In contrast, host States are usually limited to defending claims brought against them. The capacity for a host State to bring an independent counterclaim has been tested in only a handful of cases, some of which involved environmental considerations. This article considers those cases and the potential for counterclaims to help enforce national and international objectives related to the environment. It does so by setting out the legal framework for counterclaims by host States, analyzing how jurisdiction, admissibility and causes of action involving environmental obligations under domestic and international law may be satisfied, and the attendant consequences for liability and compensation. It then considers the implications of counterclaims for future investment disputes, given the rapid development of international and domestic environmental law and policy, especially in the context of corporate governance, climate change and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
引用
收藏
页码:413 / 440
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Assessing the Normative Legitimacy of Investment Arbitration: The EU's Investment Court System [J].
Diependaele, Lisa ;
De Ville, Ferdi ;
Sterckx, Sigrid .
NEW POLITICAL ECONOMY, 2019, 24 (01) :37-61
[22]   Judicial economy and moving bars in international investment arbitration [J].
Johns, Leslie ;
Thrall, Calvin ;
Wellhausen, Rachel L. .
REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, 2020, 15 (04) :923-945
[23]   INSTITUTIONAL LOCK-IN WITHIN THE FIELD OF INVESTMENT ARBITRATION [J].
Bjorklund, Andrea K. ;
Druzin, Bryan H. .
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 2018, 39 (03) :707-+
[24]   International investment arbitration and the international fight against corruption [J].
Valenzuela, Christian Carbajal ;
Mendoza Neyra, Yolanda .
DERECHO PUCP, 2021, (86) :107-143
[25]   PREDICTABILITY VERSUS FLEXIBILITY Secrecy in International Investment Arbitration [J].
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. ;
Steinert-Threlkeld, Zachary C. ;
Victor, David G. .
WORLD POLITICS, 2016, 68 (03) :413-+
[26]   Triangular Treaties: The Extent and Limits of Investment Treaty Rights [J].
Roberts, Anthea .
HARVARD INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL, 2015, 56 (02) :353-417
[27]   The concept of sustainable development in investment arbitration: A disconnect from investment policymaking and international adjudication [J].
Marcoux, Jean-Michel .
LEIDEN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 2025,
[28]   "Necessity," Investor Rights, and State Sovereignty for NAFTA Investment Arbitration [J].
Galvez, Cynthia C. .
CORNELL INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL, 2013, 46 (01) :143-163
[29]   Intra-EU Investment Contract Arbitration after Achmea [J].
Konstantinidis, Mark .
INTERNATIONAL & COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY, 2025, 74 (01) :225-245
[30]   Towards a New Heuristic Model: Investment Arbitration as a Political System [J].
Dupont, Cedric ;
Schultz, Thomas .
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, 2016, 7 (01) :3-30