INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW

INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW

1. Discuss, with historical references and examples, the appropriateness of the Calvo Doctrine to address the current problems of the system of international investment law.

2. The problem of the lack of a definition of ‘investment’ in the ICSID Convention has been partially solved by means of the development of the so-called ‘Salini criteria’. However, the ICSID case-law and the most recent BITs show that the ‘Salini criteria’ may no longer be sufficient to cover the wide range of economic activities that states and investors deem to be worth of treaty protection. Discuss this problem with appropriate references to treaties, case-law and scholarly contributions.

3. ‘Pre-establishment requirements in BITs are crucial instruments to control the entry of foreign entities in the economy of a state, but they may create a hostile environment for investors.’ Discuss.
4. Notwithstanding the attempts to regulate international investment on a multilateral basis, bilateral investment treaties still are the states’ preferred method for the regulation of foreign investment. Discuss the reasons behind such preference and the effect it has on the economic development of capital-importing countries.
5. ‘Although investment law is aimed at the protection of foreign investors, the investment scenario currently features multiple investors that are economically – and often politically – more powerful than the states they invest in. Multinational corporations should therefore be liable under international law in order to even out the field of international investment.’ Discuss.
6. Define the evolution of the purpose and scope of the Fair and Equitable Treatment standard. Can the current system of international investment law afford to have a ‘fluid’ definition of Fair and Equitable Treatment?
7. Discuss the reasons behind the decline of claims of expropriation by investors in investment arbitration, and the rise of Fair and Equitable Treatment as the preferred basis for investment claims.
8. Assess, from an international law standpoint, the correctness of the extension of the Full Protection and Security standard to cover issues of ‘legal violence’ against investors.
9. ‘The system of investment arbitration is one that, notwithstanding the lack of empirical evidence, looks very much biased in favour of foreign investors’. Discuss this statement, proving your point with reference to cases and scholarly contributions.

find the cost of your paper