投資家の正当な期待の保護 ― 条約義務と法の一般原則との交錯 (Protection of the Investor's Legitimate Expectations: Intersection of a Treaty Obligation and a General Principle of Law)

Wenhua Shan ed., China and International Investment Law, Leiden, Brill, 2014, ISBN: 9789004279643, pp. 141-169, 2014

RIETI Discussion Paper Series 14-J-002, January 2014

26 Pages Posted: 6 Oct 2015

See all articles by Shotaro Hamamoto

Shotaro Hamamoto

Kyoto University - Faculty of Law

Date Written: January 1, 2014

Abstract

Japanese Abstract: 投資条約仲裁において、「投資家の正当な期待)」を保護すべし、との判断が示される機会が増えている。とりわけ、投資条約の多くに含まれている公正衡平待遇条項との関連でこの議論がなされ、投資家の正当な期待が保護されなかったのだから公正衡平待遇条項違反が生じる、という判断が多く示されている。投資設立の時点において、投資受入国が何らかの行為をなし、それを信頼して投資を行った投資家の期待を保護する、という判断である。初期には、投資受入国の国内法令を前提に投資がなされ、その国内法令が変更された場合に直ちに投資家の正当な期待の侵害を認める判断も見られたが、現在では、投資受入国がより特定的な投資誘因活動を行った場合にのみ投資家の正当な期待の保護が認められるようになっている。その結論自体は説得的なものであるものの、問題は「公正かつ衡平な待遇を与える」というきわめて抽象的な義務からこのような具体的な義務をどのようにして引き出すか、である。有効と考えられる説明は、Total v. Argentina仲裁(2010年)で見られるような、法の一般原則を用いるものである。「投資家の正当な期待」を保護する法の一般原則があり、条約規定解釈はその法の一般原則を考慮してなさねばならない(条約法条約31条3項(c))との議論は、各国国内法(とりわけ行政法)の比較法研究を行うならば、かなり説得的であると共に、投資条約仲裁に対する正統性批判に対する効果的な応答にもなり得る。もっとも、法の一般原則確定のための比較法研究には困難な理論的・技術的問題もあり、さらなる研究が求められる。

English Abstract: In treaty-based investment arbitration, tribunals quite often render their awards referring to the protection of the investor's legitimate expectations. A number of tribunals deal with this issue in the context of the application of the fair and equitable treatment clause and argue that the clause is (not) violated because the investor's legitimate expectations are (not) frustrated. Tribunals consider that such expectations are generated by conducts (or omissions) by the host State when the investor decides to make investment in reliance of such conducts by the host State. Early tribunals found a frustration of the investor's legitimate expectations in cases where the host State modified its domestic laws and regulations in reliance of which the investor had decided to make investment. However, recent tribunals tend to consider that a more specific representation by the host State is required to find a violation of the fair and equitable treatment clause. The question is how to justify such conclusion on the basis of the notoriously vague notion of fair and equitable treatment. An interesting explanation was furnished by Total v. Argentina (2010), in which the tribunal considered that relevant treaty provisions should be interpreted taking into account a general principle of law protecting the investor's legitimate expectations, in light of Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Several comparative law studies reveal that this solution is quite valid. Furthermore, this approach will be an effective response to a number of questions and doubts manifested in respect of the legitimacy of treaty-based investment arbitration. Needless to say, there remain difficult theoretical and technical problems regarding the identification of general principles of law, which necessitate further research.

Note: Downloadable document is in Japanese.

Suggested Citation

Hamamoto, Shotaro, 投資家の正当な期待の保護 ― 条約義務と法の一般原則との交錯 (Protection of the Investor's Legitimate Expectations: Intersection of a Treaty Obligation and a General Principle of Law) (January 1, 2014). Wenhua Shan ed., China and International Investment Law, Leiden, Brill, 2014, ISBN: 9789004279643, pp. 141-169, 2014, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 14-J-002, January 2014, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2666841

Shotaro Hamamoto (Contact Author)

Kyoto University - Faculty of Law ( email )

Yoshida-Honmachi
Sakyo-ku
Kyoto, 606-8501
Japan

HOME PAGE: http://www.hamamoto.law.kyoto-u.ac.jp

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
105
Abstract Views
829
Rank
481,982
PlumX Metrics