How Exactly Does China Consent to Investor-State Arbitration: On the First ICSID Case against China

Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 265-291, November 2012

28 Pages Posted: 2 Dec 2012

See all articles by Tong Qi

Tong Qi

Wuhan University - Institute of International Law

Date Written: 2012

Abstract

Ekran Berhad, a Malaysia company, submitted the first ICSID case against China in May 2011. This case is subject to uncertainty with regard to certain jurisdiction issues. The author attempts to examine: (1) the history and evolution of the consent clause in China’s BITs; (2) the interpretation and application of the consent clause in China-Malaysia BIT; (3) the effect and impact of China’s notification under Article 25(4) of ICSID Convention; (4) whether investors could use the MFN clause to argue for more open access to ICSID arbitration; (5) an outlook of the case of Ekran v. China and its impact on the future of China’s BITs practices.

Keywords: ICSID, international investment arbitration, Expansion of Jurisdiction, Consent Clause, MFN Clause, Chinese BITs, Ekron v. China, ICSID Convention Article 25(4)

Suggested Citation

Qi, Tong, How Exactly Does China Consent to Investor-State Arbitration: On the First ICSID Case against China (2012). Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 265-291, November 2012, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2181451

Tong Qi (Contact Author)

Wuhan University - Institute of International Law ( email )

Wuhan, Hubei
China

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
853
Abstract Views
3,264
Rank
52,458
PlumX Metrics