Dilemma of and China’s Response to the Application of the Rules on Investors’ Reasonable Expectations from the Perspective of International Investment Arbitration

Guangzhao Xu

doi:10.62051/91kvn202

Authors

Guangzhao Xu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/91kvn202

Keywords:

Investors’ reasonable expectations; Fair and equitable treatment; International investment arbitration; International Investment Law.

Abstract

The rule on investors’ reasonable expectation aims to protect the rights and interests of foreign investors, which is often cited by arbitral tribunals in the practice of international investment arbitration in recent years. It can be divided into different categories according to its different bases. However, there are many problems in the application of this principle in the practice of international investment arbitration. Based on its significance in protecting the legitimate rights and interests of investors as well as the universality of the use of arbitral tribunals, the improvement of relevant clauses and due diligence and specific written commitments are the focus of countries and investors. It is also necessary for all host countries and investors to properly handle and break through this dilemma. If China is the host country, relevant applicable risk plans should be given to implement the national strategy of “going global” for Chinese enterprises.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Rawls, “Two Concepts of Rules”, Philosophy Review, 1955, 64(1), p.3.

[2] D Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, Oxford University Press, 2000, p.524.

[3] See CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentina, ICSID ARB/01/8, Award of 12 May 2005, para. 279.

[4] Y C Mo, “On the Legislative Constrains on Administrative Directives”, China Legal Science, 2004, (2), p. 50.

[5] Southern Pacific Properties v. Egypt, ICSID Case No.ARB/84/3, Award on the Merits, 20 May 1992, para. 83.

[6] W Teerawat, Protection of Legitimate Expectations in Investment Treaty Arbitration A Theory of Detrimental Reliance, Cambridge University Press, 2019, p.19.

[7] T Técnicas Medioambientales, S.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/00/2, Award, 29May 2003.

[8] Z Trevor, “Charting the Wrong Course: The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations in InvestmentTreaty Law”, Alberta Law Review, 49, 1(2011): 210.

[9] M Byers, Custom, Powers and the Power of Rules. International Relations and CustomaryInternational Law, Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 107.

[10] S Liu, “On the Introduction and Application of the Principle of Legitimate Expectations in the International Investment Law”, Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), 2022, (1), p. 167.

[11] Saluka Investments B.V. v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Partial Award of 17 March 2006

[12] Saluka Investments B.V. v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Partial Award of 17 March 2006

[13] Saipem SpA v. People’s Republic of Bangladesh, ICSID Case No ARB/05/07, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures (21 March 2007).

[14] S Chen, “Defence of Investor’s Legitimate Expectations and State’s Regulatory Right”, Journal of Hubei University of Economics, 2020, (6),

[15] Y He & F Gu, “Reflection on the Application of Proportionality Principle in International Investment Arbitration: Field Boundary and Normative Tension”, Wuhan University International Law Review, 2023, (2), p. 143.

[16] Y Zhu, “Intellectual Property Protection Disputes Under International Investment Agreements: Challenges to Fair and Equitable Treatment and Their Solutions”, Global Law Review, 2023, 45(05), p. 209-224.

[17] D N Liang & H S Tang, “Study on Renewable Energy Investment Arbitration in the Context of Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality Goals: From the Perspective of Legitimate Expectation of Investors”, Wuhan University International Law Review, 2023, 7(04), p. 119-140.

[18] H C Zuo & X Yan, “Research on Obligation Elements of Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Agreement”, Social Sciences in Chinese Higher Education Institutions, 2022, (01), p. 70-82+158-159.

[19] S Dias & Fernando. “Charanne and Construction Investments v. Spain: Legitimate Expectations and Investments in Renewable Energy”, Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 26(2), 2017, pp. 174-180.

[20] Southern Pacific Properties v. Egypt, ICSID Case No.ARB/84/3, Award on the Merits, 20 May 1992, para. 83.