Recent Bit Decisions and Composite Acts Straddling the Date a Treaty Comes into Force
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9928405 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nick Gallus (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2007 |
| Volume | 56 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 491-513 |
| Publication date | 2007-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International and Comparative Law Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5893 • E-ISSN: 1471-6895 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1093/iclq/lei180 |
| OpenAlex | W2008134512 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
The success of an international claim impugning a series of State acts, or a ‘composite act’, straddling the date a treaty comes into force can depend on the weight the tribunal gives to the elements of the composite act occurring before that date. Recent bilateral investment treaty decisions highlight ambiguities on this critical issue. One tribunal practically ignored State acts occurring before the treaty came into force in finding that there had been no breach of the treaty, whereas another tribunal considered those previous acts in reaching the opposite conclusion. This paper identifies steps to ensure future tribunals give consistent weight to the elements of a composite act occurring before a treaty comes into force
Bilateral investment treaty · Foreign direct investment · International investment · Political science · State (computer science · Treaty · Tribunal · Computer Science · International Arbitration and Investment Law · Law
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |