Investments on Disputed Territory: Indispensable Parties and Indispensable Issues

Article, Brazilian Journal of International Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 122-138 (2017)

17 Pages Posted: 2 Sep 2016 Last revised: 24 Nov 2017

Date Written: 2017

Abstract

International investment agreements generally only protect investments in the ‘territory’ of the respondent State. As a result, an investment tribunal seized of a dispute concerning an investment on disputed territory may have to determine whether the respondent State has sovereignty over the territory in question. This should create some discomfort for two reasons. First, the tribunal may be exceeding its jurisdiction ratione personae, as it would be ruling on the sovereignty dispute with only one of the disputing States at the table. Second, the tribunal may be exceeding its jurisdiction ratione materiae, as it generally only has the power to rule on investment disputes, not sovereignty disputes. This Article explores the merits of two preliminary objections — corresponding to these two jurisdictional problems — to claims concerning investments on disputed territory: the doctrine of indispensable parties and the doctrine of indispensable issues.

Keywords: international law, investment, arbitration, disputes, territory, jurisdiction, admissibility, indispensable parties, indispensable issues, Crimea, Ukraine, Russia

Suggested Citation

Tzeng, Peter, Investments on Disputed Territory: Indispensable Parties and Indispensable Issues (2017). Article, Brazilian Journal of International Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 122-138 (2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2831545 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2831545

Peter Tzeng (Contact Author)

Foley Hoag LLP ( email )

United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
266
Abstract Views
986
rank
117,314
PlumX Metrics