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
[41]   The precarity of the police powers doctrine in investment arbitration: Rockhopper v Italy [J].
Carvosso, Rhys .
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, 2024, 15 (01) :172-189
[42]   Investment Arbitration Appellate Mechanism Options: Consistency, Accuracy, and Balance of Power [J].
Feldman, Mark .
ICSID REVIEW-FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL, 2017, 32 (03) :528-544
[43]   EU Investors versus EU States: International Arbitration of Investment Disputes [J].
Donaubauer, Julian ;
Nunnenkamp, Peter .
JCMS-JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES, 2018, 56 (06) :1376-1393
[44]   The Use of the UNIDROIT Principles and Other Transnational Principles of Commercial Law in Treaty Arbitration: Hazards and Opportunities [J].
Carlevaris, Andrea .
ICSID REVIEW-FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL, 2022, 36 (03) :592-616
[45]   The Economic Structure of International Investment Agreements with Implications for Treaty Interpretation and Design [J].
Sykes, Alan O. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 2019, 113 (03) :482-534
[46]   Legal Aid and Investment Treaty Disputes: Lessons Learned from the Advisory Centre on WTO Law and Investment Experiences [J].
Schwieder, Robert W. .
JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT & TRADE, 2018, 19 (04) :628-666
[47]   Enabling Investment in Environmental Sustainability [J].
Hughes, Heather .
INDIANA LAW JOURNAL, 2010, 85 (02) :597-651
[49]   Procedural Cross-Fertilization in International Commercial and Investment Arbitration: A Functional Approach [J].
Meshel, Tamar .
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, 2021, 12 (04) :585-616
[50]   Empirical Perspectives on Investment Arbitration: What Do We Know? Does It Matter? [J].
Behn, Daniel ;
Langford, Malcolm ;
Letourneau-Tremblay, Laura .
JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT & TRADE, 2020, 21 (2-3) :188-250