Cette thèse propose une étude globale sur les contrats build-operate-transfer (BOT). Ils sont traités dans leurs aspects financiers, juridiques et contractuels. Les investissements dans les infrastructures publiques telles que les transports, l’eau, l’énergie constituent non seulement un outil de développement économique, mais aussi contribuent à l’amélioration des conditions de vie humaine. Mais, pour réaliser ces projets souvent de taille importante, le financement est un des principaux soucis des décideurs publics. En particulier, le Cambodge figure parmi les États à bas revenus. Les contraintes financières sont telles que l’État recourt de plus en plus au secteur privé, notamment par le biais des contrats BOT. Par cette technique, l’État peut cibler ses besoins spécifiques, tout en évitant le déficit budgétaire. En contrepartie, le secteur privé bénéficie d’un droit d’exploiter une infrastructure en cause pour une durée généralement longue pendant laquelle il rentabilise ses investissements.En se basant sur l’association des intérêts publics et privés, la mise en œuvre des contrats BOT nécessite un cadre juridique adéquate, sans lequel les intérêts publics pourraient être menacés, et cela pourrait être dissuasif pour la décision des investisseurs, notamment étrangers. / This thesis suggests a comprehensive study on the build-operate-transfer contracts (BOT). They are analysed in their financial, legal and contractual aspects.Investment in public infrastructure such as transport, water, energy is not only a tool for economic development, but also contributes to the improvement of human life’s conditions. However, to achieve these major projects, funding is a major concern of policy makers. In particular, Cambodia is among the States with low income. Financial constraints are such that the State resorts increasingly to the private sector, including through BOT contracts. By this technique, the State can target their specific needs, while avoiding the budget deficit. In return, the private sector has a right to operate the infrastructure in question for a period generally long during which it recovers its investments.Based on a combination of public and private interests, the implementation of BOT contracts requires a proper legal framework, without which public interests might be threatened, and that could be a deterrent for the decision of investors, especially foreigners.

Am Beispiel der UdSSR werden formale und inhaltliche Voraussetzungen eines Beitritts eines (noch) "sozialistischen" Staates mit einer Zentralverwaltungswirtschaft zu den beiden wichtigsten internationalen Finanzinstitutionen, Internationaler Währungsfonds und Weltbank (samt deren "Schwester"-Organisationen), diskutiert.

Das herkömmliche völkerrechtliche Institut des diplomatischen Schutzes ist im Verhältnis zwischen Staaten (als originären Völkerrechtssubjekten) entstanden. Aber auch intergouvernmentale Organisationen sind in der Lage, Maßnahmen mit unmittelbarer Rechtswirkung gegenüber Einzelpersonen zu treffen, so daß auch hier die Frage aufzuwerfen ist, wann und mit welchen Mitteln der jeweilige Heimatstaat die (Grund-)Rechte seiner Staatsangehörigen gegenüber einer solchen Organisation geltend machen kann.

Disposal with an Investment Claim JUDr. Filip Černý International investment protection is very special legal discipline which stands at the borderline between public and private, international and national (domestic) law. The intersections between these legal areas produce a vast range of questions on the applicable law and the nature of the legal institutes inherent to investment protection. The legal system of investment protection is founded on a matrix consisting of bilateral and multilateral treaties and simultaneously shares some of the customary origins inherent to diplomatic protection of foreigners. The particularity of the investment protection system is given by the existence of the diagonal relations between the host state and the investor of the other state. The combination of the public international law sources and the diagonal relations developing inside the public international law matrix induce questions on the nature of such rights and obligations arising inside of the investment protection system among its actors. Author analyses these relations with an aim to determine the nature of the investment claim as a prerequisite for a volitional disposal of the investment claim by the investor.

伴隨著全球化潮流的來臨，國際直接投資金額大幅成長，相對的，投資爭端案件亦持續增加，國際投資人於是迫切期待一個有效而公平之國際投資爭端解決機制。台灣經過多年經濟發展，已成為全球重要對外投資國家，惟根據調查，台灣廠商發生投資爭端，並不擅於利用國際仲裁維護其本身權益。據此，本論文乃針對國際投資協定有關投資人與地主國爭端解決法制加以研析，並希望能對我政府對外談判及廠商對外投資提供具體實用之對策，惟國際間對於投資人與地主國爭端解決機制研究面向相當廣泛，本文研究主軸則以世界銀行於1965年成立之國際解決投資爭端中心(ICSID)之管轄權為中心。 本論文先自投資人與地主國爭端解決機制之發展背景介紹起，並論述1966年生效的ICSID公約主要條款與其他國際投資協定的關係，其後則進一步從ICSID管轄權角度切入，對ICSID對人(ratione personae)及對物(ratione materiae)管轄權相關法律問題逐一說明，並輔以個案加以研析之。 經過上述分析後，本文繼而對現行投資人與地主國投資爭端解決機制提出評論，在制度面方面，本文對ICSID未來運作提出放寬對物管轄範圍、檢討投資未予定義之作法、雙重國籍認定及外國控制的程度與形式等四項改革建議。此外，本文亦針對ICSID管轄權與BITs最惠國待遇條款問題、BITs不同的爭端解決機制所引發程序衝突問題，以及仲裁判斷衝突(conflicting award)問題，說明ICSID公約與BIT所產生之一些法律問題。在未來展望方面，則分析在多邊投資架構是否為解決現階段投資人與地主國爭端解決機制之新契機，以及WTO納入投資人與地主國爭端解決條款之可能性分析，本文末並對我國政府與廠商現階段利用ICSID機制提出建議。 / While the inexorable trend towards globalization has caused international direct investment to grow dramatically, it has also led to a steady increase in the number of investment disputes. International investors therefore eagerly look forward to the institution of an effective and impartial international investment dispute resolution mechanism. Although Taiwan, through its many years of economic development, has become a major source of foreign investment, surveys show that Taiwan firms are not good at using international arbitration to protect their rights and interests in investment disputes. This study accordingly analyzes the investor-State dispute settlement provisions in international investment agreements(IIAs) in an effort to provide concrete, practical strategies for the government of Taiwan in international negotiations and for Taiwanese firms in their foreign investment. Since there is already extensive research literature addressing investor-State dispute settlement mechanisms, this study focuses on the jurisdiction of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Dispute(ICSID) under the aegis of the World Bank in 1965. This study first introduces investor-State dispute settlement mechanisms and their development. Next, the study discusses the main provisions of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention) came into force on 1966 and its relationship to other IIAs. The study then explains the various legal issues connected with ICSID’s jurisdiction ratione personae and ratione materiae, and finally, analyzes specific cases. The results of the aforementioned analysis are employed to critique existing investor-State investment dispute settlement mechanisms. This study makes four system-related recommendations, namely that the ICSID convention should: 1) liberalize the scope of ICSID’s subject-matter jurisdiction; 2) review undefined investment methods; 3) recognize dual nationalities; and 4) reform the degree and circumstances of foreign control. This study further discusses legal problems related to the ICSID Convention and bilateral investment treaties (BITs), including conflicting awards, procedural conflicts stemming from different dispute settlement forum in BITs, and problems involving ICSID's jurisdiction and most-favored nation(MFN) provisions in BITs. As for future prospects, the study analyzes whether the current multilateral investment framework can resolve the problems of the current investor-State dispute settlement mechanism, and examines the possibility of incorporating investor-State dispute settlement mechanism in the WTO. This study concludes with recommendations concerning how the government and companies of Taiwan can use the ICSID mechanism at the current stage.

Le droit des investissements internationaux est largement présenté au travers de la jurisprudence arbitrale, notamment celle du CIRDI. Une telle approche a paru insuffisante. En effet, dans l'examen des questions touchant le droit des investissements internationaux, la jurisprudence de la CIJ et de sa devancière semble être un passage obligé à certains égards. S'agissant de règles primaires, c’est dans la jurisprudence de la Cour qu’ont émergé et pris forme certaines règles substantielles relatives aux investissements internationaux, et dont la désuétude est loin d'être établie par l'avènement du CIRDI. Par ailleurs, le rôle général de la Cour dans le fonctionnement de l'ordre juridique international à travers les règles juridictionnelles, procédurales, d’interprétation ou encore de responsabilité internationale, est indéniable. Or, certaines de ces règles se présentent comme des chapitres incontournables du droit des investissements internationaux. Ce sont là autant de raisons qui ont conduit à entreprendre une étude sur Le droit des investissements internationaux vu par la CIJ et le CIRDI en l’abordant au travers de la question de savoir si les tribunaux CIRDI puisent dans l’héritage de la Cour sur les problématiques juridiques relatives aux investissements internationaux ou s’en départissent. La confrontation des jurisprudences de la Cour et des tribunaux CIRDI a permis de conclure que le droit des investissements internationaux vu par la CIJ n’est que partiellement le droit des investissements internationaux vu par les tribunaux CIRDI. Globalement, sur une problématique donnée, en même temps que certaines solutions retenues par la jurisprudence des tribunaux CIRDI dénotent un emprunt aux règles et principes posés par la Cour, d’autres s’en départissent, qu'il s'agisse des règles primaires en la matière, ou bien des règles secondaires du droit international dans leur déclinaison dans le cadre du droit des investissements internationaux. Parce qu’elle livre, entre autres, une vue d’ensemble de la jurisprudence de la Cour de la Haye en matière d’investissements internationaux – démarche inédite –, la thèse se présente comme une piste pour les arbitres sur le chemin de l’émergence d’une jurisprudence arbitrale cohérente en droit des investissements internationaux. / To international investment law questions, the ICJ decisions are materials that must be taken into consideration. Indeed, substantive rules in international investment law and their issues are older than the ICSID creation. The legal issues had already been raised in the Court which set rules and principles covering international investment law principles. Thus, it is into the Court’s decisions that some rules relating to international investments was created. From this perspective, the ICJ cases could be seen as a legitimate forerunner for substantive rules in international investment law. In the other hand, the ICJ has a main role in the development and promotion of the rules of international litigation, some of which are of relevance in international investment law. The present work, by using the ICJ cases as guidance precedents, challenges the ICSID decisions to determine if the ICSID follows or not the rules and principles raised by the Court in international investment law. The analysis shows that if some ICSID decisions borrow the principles and rules established by the ICJ, others follow new ways in both primary and secondary rules in international investment law.

L'investissement est une notion récente dans la sphère juridique. Voici quelques années, elle n'était encore employée que dans la règlementation relative au contrôle des investissements étrangers. C'est que, si le droit n'ignorait pas l'investissement, il le saisissait presque uniquement à travers d'autres notions, tels l'apport en société ou le mouvement de capital. Depuis lors, le mot a été très largement juridicisé. Pour s'en tenir à deux exemples, on peut ainsi relever que, dans notre ordre interne, l'existence d'un investissement permet une durée contractuelle longue et que, dans l'ordre international, la qualification d'investissement est aujourd'hui une condition de la compétence des tribunaux arbitraux statuant sous l'égide du Cirdi.Cet accès spontané de l'investissement à la juridicité s'est malheureusement accompagné de certaines incohérences. Ainsi, le mot est parfois employé de manière excessivement large, comme en droit des marchés financiers, où il désigne toute opération relative à un instrument financier. De même, en droit des régimes matrimoniaux, ce que la Cour de cassation nomme les « dépenses d'investissement » recouvre en réalité l'ensemble des dépenses immobilières. Parfois, à l'inverse, certaines opérations dont la qualification d'investissement ne fait aucun doute continuent d'être envisagées à travers des notions qui en sont le simple reflet. L'objet de la thèse est donc de rétablir une certaine cohérence dans l'emploi du mot investissement en proposant une définition juridique de la notion et en esquissant certains éléments du régime qui s'y attache. / Investment is a relatively new legal concept. Some years ago, the term was only used within the foreign investment regulations. Back then, investment was mostly happrehended through other legal concepts, such as capital contribution or capital movement. Since then, however, the concept of investment has largely entered the legal vocabulary. For instance, it turns out that, in the French legal order, the existence of an investment makes the conclusion of a long duration contract possible. Besides, it may also be noted that, in the international order, the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal established under the aegis of the ICSID is limited to the disputes that arise out of an investment.Such a phenomenon has unfortunately brought on various inconsistencies. Thus, the term appears to be used in ways that sometimes make its meaning overly wide, as in securities law, in which investment refers to all kinds of operations related to financial instruments. Similarly, in matrimonial property regimes, what the French Cour de cassation calls "investment spending" includes all real estate spending. Sometimes, on the contrary, investment is still being apprehended through other concepts that are the simple reflection of that very concept. Therefore, the purpose of this dissertation is to establish some consistency in the use of the term investment by proposing a legal definition of the concept and outlining some elements of its regime.

We begin with a short analysis of the history of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). We then discuss the merits and demerits of the regime, such as the arguments between finality, speediness, and correctness. Following from this, historical reforms are discussed, and whether those issues have gotten worse or better since these discussions. The modern problems are discussed, leading to the explanation of the “legitimacy crisis”. As Appellate Mechanisms (AM) and Investment Court Systems (ICS) both propose multi layered systems, we argue whether ISDS must be a “one bite at the apple” system. We expand on the issues of regulatory chill, before showing the contradictions in the granting of awards. From this, a discussion is raised on the advantages of a tenured system of adjudicators, particularly in reference to their apparent bias. We delve deeper into the direct consequences of the perceived issues of ISDS, in the context of human rights, the environment, and other issues of sovereignty.As more reforms are suggested, the question of “what makes arbitration, arbitration?” is raised. From here, we may begin to suggest reforms based on which key factors are to be preserved. Firstly, we discuss current reform options, such as the Mauritius Convention. We take inspiration from existing AM, and prior discussions on the implementation of such a system across the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) frameworks. We analyse whether these discussions have led to change by comparing trends in drafting.Thereon, we offer suggestions of reform. ICS and how this would be implemented, what it would look like structurally, and its positive and negative effects. Using the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and other contemporary ICS reform suggestions, we gain some knowledge of what an ICS regime could and should look like, the implementation of AM previously discussed in this regime, and other. Finally, we offer a different solution to the problems, yet less pragmatic, the termination of arbitration.

1 Abstract This dissertation deals with investment protection in the European Union from several points of view. The first part deals with the history of investment protection and its main basis and grounds for current legislation and proposals for future regulation, particularly within the EU. In subsequent parts, current legislation and intra-European Union investment protection is analysed in detail, including the question of validity and applicability of Intra-EU BITs, i.e. bilateral treaties concluded between two EU Member States. The analysis is made from the perspective of EU law, as well as from the point of view of public international law. The dissertation further deals with their relationship and demonstrates contradictions between them in two crucial cases, Eureko/Achmea and Micula. Additional themes of this dissertation are the powers of the European Union regarding investment protection and the conclusion of international treaties such as CETA and TTIP. This dissertation further deals with the status, jurisdiction and functioning of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), demonstrating the relatively smooth and widely accepted investment dispute settlement mechanism. In this regard, the proposed EU Multilateral Investment Court project in analysed, including a...

The relationship between international investment agreements and EU law has attracted increased attention in past few years. The aim of this thesis is to bring a detailed analysis of various aspects of this complicated relationship. In attainment of this aim it proceeds in the following steps. After a short introduction (Chapter I.), Chapter II. briefly overviews typical content of bilateral investment treaties, following with a more detailed analysis of relevant EU law rules concerning foreign investment and subsequent comparison of both sets of rules. Chapter III. deals with investment agreements to be concluded by the EU, in particular with questions of external competence for foreign investment, responsibility for breaches of investment agreements concluded by the EU and the future shape of EU investment policy. The status of existing bilateral investment treaties concluded between EU member states and third countries is analyzed in Chapter IV. Chapter V. tackles various issues related to investment treaties concluded between member states (so called intra-EU BITs).