Author:
Batifort Simon,Heath J. Benton
Abstract
AbstractThis article challenges the conventional wisdom that MFN clauses in investment treaties can always be used to “import” substantive standards of treatment (e.g. FET). It argues that most tribunals permitting this use of MFN clauses have relied on presumptions and have ignored meaningful variations among clauses. It also points out that states are increasingly questioning the conventional view, and that a recent arbitral award has firmly rejected an attempt to use an MFN clause to import substantive standards. It concludes by sketching the terms of the new MFN debate.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference47 articles.
1. Power and Persuasion in Investment Treaty Interpretation: The Dual Roles of States;Roberts;AJIL,2010
2. The Transnational Protection of Private Rights: Issues, Challenges, and Possible Solutions;Menon;ASIL Proc.,2015
3. NAFTA Chapter 11: Procedural Aspects of Non-disputing Party Interventions in Chapter 11 Arbitrations;Hunter;Asper Rev. Int'l Bus. and Trade L.,2003
Cited by
43 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献