The Adequacy of Reasoning in the Arbitral Tribunal's Decision in Saluka Investments v. Czech Republic
George Stephanov Georgiev
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
January 31, 2008
A version of this paper was published in "The Reasons Requirement in International Investment Arbitration: Critical Case Studies" (Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez & W. Michael Reisman eds., 2008).
This paper was written as part of a project that analyzed recent international investment arbitration decisions with respect to the quality and adequacy of the reasoning provided by the tribunal and its compliance with the reasons requirements contained in the applicable legal framework (e.g., Article 48(3) of the ICSID Convention, Article 47(1)(i) of the ICSID Arbitration Rules, Article 52(2)(i) of the ICSID Additional Facility Rules, Article 32(3) of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, customary international law, etc.). In line with the goals of the project, the paper focuses primarily on the grounds which the tribunal in Saluka v. Czech Republic provided in support of its legal conclusions, without necessarily analyzing the merits of these conclusions.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 28
Keywords: international investment arbitration, ICSID Convention, UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, fair and equitable treatment standardworking papers series
Date posted: November 16, 2008 ; Last revised: November 20, 2008
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.375 seconds