The Next Battleground: Standards of Review in Investment Treaty Arbitration

16 International Council for Commercial Arbitration Congress Series 170 (2011)

11 Pages Posted: 7 Dec 2012  

Anthea Roberts

Australian National University (ANU); School of Regulation & Global Governance (RegNet)

Date Written: 2011

Abstract

We are witnessing growing calls by States, academics and NGOs for investment arbitral tribunals to recognize that they are engaged in a form of international judicial review and thus should adopt appropriate levels of deference when reviewing the legislative, executive and judicial acts of respondent States. Some draw on domestic public law comparisons, arguing that tribunals should adopt deferential standards of review when adjudicating upon governmental conduct. Others rely on international comparisons, invoking notions such as the margin of appreciation doctrine that some international courts adopt when reviewing State actions for conformity with international obligations. Whether and when investment treaty tribunals should adopt deferential standards of review represents the next battleground for those who conceptualize investment treaty arbitration as a form of global governance.

Keywords: investment treaties, investment treaty arbitration, arbitration, standards of review, deference, margin of appreciation

Suggested Citation

Roberts, Anthea, The Next Battleground: Standards of Review in Investment Treaty Arbitration (2011). 16 International Council for Commercial Arbitration Congress Series 170 (2011). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2186208

Anthea Roberts (Contact Author)

Australian National University (ANU) ( email )

Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2601
Australia

School of Regulation & Global Governance (RegNet) ( email )

Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 0200
Australia

Paper statistics

Downloads
484
Rank
46,794
Abstract Views
2,012