Abstract
This essay discusses the challenges associated with the definition of legitimate expectations in host-state dispute settlement. The concept of legitimate expectations requires the government to respect citizens' expectations of policy continuity and stability based on legal principles and has become a self-standing doctrine in international investment contracts. However, the lack of clarity in interpretation and diligence on the part of the host nation has resulted in inconsistent outcomes in similar situations, undermining legal certainty. Additionally, the longstanding defense of legitimate expectations has weakened the host country's authority to regulate. The essay provides recommendations, including recognizing the factors that give rise to legitimate expectations, operating in an open and transparent manner, scrutinizing informal representations of governmental intent, and instituting a reasonable response program to avoid liability for necessary government actions.
Publisher
Darcy & Roy Press Co. Ltd.
Reference36 articles.
1. L. Harold Levinson, 'The Legitimate Expectation that Public Officials Will Act Consistently', American Journal of Comparative Law, 46 (Suppl. 1): 549-75, 1998.
2. Yenkong Ngangjoh-Hodu and Collins C. Ajibo, Legitimate Expectation in Investor-State Arbitration: Re-contextualising a Controversial Concept from a Developing Country Perspective, Manchester Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 15, Issue 1: 45-61 2018.
3. Rudolf Dolzer & Christoph Schreuer, Principles of International Investment Law, p.140, 2008.
4. Continental Casualty v. Argentine, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/9,Award, 5 September 2008.
5. Duke Energy Electroquil Partners and Electroquil SA v. Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/19, Award, 12 August 2008.