This thesis proposes that conscious and increased co-operation and coordination of the relationship between investment tribunals and domestic courts can greatly improve the efficacy of the international investment arbitration system, and further the rule of law. The extent of the power both forums wield, the level of influence both systems have on each other and the critical roles both systems play in the resolution of investment disputes warrant a systematic approach to cooperation and coordination. This study finds justification for this proposition by analyzing the policy implications of investment arbitration outcomes. It goes on to explore the relationship between domestic courts and investment tribunals by examining the roles they play and the areas of jurisdictional friction between the two systems. The core issues addressed include the jurisdiction and competence of international investment tribunals and domestic courts in the resolution of investment disputes; the support roles of domestic courts; anti-suit/anti-arbitration injunctions; pre-conditions to arbitration; the effects and implications of the review of investment tribunals’ decisions by domestic courts, and the review of the lawfulness of the conduct of domestic judicial systems by investment arbitration tribunals. In addressing these issues, the work examines the extent to which domestic courts and international arbitration tribunals should accord deference to each other with respect to their involvement in the resolution of investment disputes. Based on the analysis of the areas of intersection between the domestic and international investment dispute settlement systems, instances of ‘positive interactions’ are highlighted and encouraged. The study also proposes ways in which further cooperation and coordination can take place. In making these proposals, and acknowledging the differences that exist, this thesis considers the collaboration between other international adjudicatory bodies and domestic courts so as to distill lessons for the international investment arbitration system.

The purpose of my thesis is to analyse the arbitration as a means of settlement of international investment disputes. The reason for my research is the dynamic growth in number of international investment disputes which appears to examine the adaptability and viability of international law. The thesis is composed of four chapters, each of them dealing with different aspects of the problems. Chapter One is introductory, it defines basic terminology used in the thesis and deals with the means of investment protection. The chapter is subdivided into four parts. Parts One to Three describe the fundamental terms such as international investment law, international investment and investor from economic and legal points of view. Part Four describes the historical background and the current state of foreign investment protection. Chapter Two focuses on international arbitration as a means of investment disputes settlement. It mentions several possibilities and analyses the two predominant ones - the arbitration mechanisms of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the ad hoc arbitration using the UNCITRAL rules. Chapter Three investigates the position of States in these disputes. It is subdivided into three parts. Part One compares the sovereignty of States with the substantive rights of the investors. Part Two examines the relation of this system to public law and Part Three questions the interests of private arbitrators. Chapter Four provides an outline of relevant Czech case law. Although it has not been very abundant up to the present day, it illustrates well the approach to decision-making by some arbitration courts and common faults of State agencies when addressing foreign investors. Conclusions are drawn in the final part of the thesis. The main aim of the thesis is to expand my initial hypothesis that international investment arbitration forms an unprecedential system, which addresses the balance between the interests of private investors and sovereign States. The standards of investment protection as described thereinbefore appear to be a powerful instrument to strengthen the position of foreign investors. Finally, several changes in the legislation and international treaties, which would equilibrate the balance back, are suggested in the Conclusion.

The public service has been, traditionally, a domestic concept of the Administrative Law. However, as a consequence of globalization, the public service regulation by the Administration is also subject to the Global Administrative Law, specifically in the context of the international investment arbitration. / El servicio público ha sido, tradicionalmente, un concepto propio del derecho administrativo doméstico. Sin embargo, como consecuencia de la globalización, la regulación del servicio público, como manifestación de la actividad administrativa, pasa a estar regida también por el derecho administrativo global, especialmente, en el contexto del arbitraje internacional de inversiones.

No description available.

L’arbitrage international, outre le recours aux tribunaux de l’État hôte, est la méthode la plus utilisée pour régler les différends relatifs aux investissements étrangers. Plusieurs accords internationaux d’investissement incluent des dispositions ayant trait à l’arbitrage sous l’égide du Centre International pour le Règlement des Différends relatifs aux Investissements (CIRDI) mis en place par la Convention de Washington de 1966. Les tribunaux arbitraux constitués sous l’égide du Centre sont ainsi appelés à trancher des différends qui concernent la conduite d’États hôtes vis-à-vis ses investisseurs étrangers ; leurs décisions ayant de fortes conséquences sur l’intérêt public, concrètement lorsqu’il s’agit de la protection de l’environnement. L’évolution croissante du droit environnemental et son empiètement sur la protection des investissements a déclenché une série de différends qui ne se limitent plus à mettre en cause des nationalisations ou des violations de contrats - comme auparavant - mais tournent souvent autour de mesures étatiques de politique publique qui impliquent des questions sensibles telles que, inter alia, la gestion de déchets dangereux, l’accès à l’eau potable, l’étalement urbain, la protection de la biodiversité. Par conséquent, le rôle des tribunaux CIRDI et de leurs décisions devient décisif dans le développement du droit des investissements et dans le débat sur la protection des investissements face aux mesures législatives en matière environnementale. Cette étude a pour objet d’analyser la place des considérations environnementales dans les sentences arbitrales CIRDI. Spécifiquement, il s’agit d’étaler les principaux arguments retenus par les tribunaux internationaux, et de dégager les grandes tendances jurisprudentielles en matière d’arbitrage international d’investissements face aux mesures environnementales. / International arbitration is one of the most frequently used methods to resolve disputes related to foreign investment. Several international investment agreements include provisions relating to arbitration under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes established by the Washington Convention of 1966. Arbitral tribunals are called to resolve disputes concerning the conduct of host States vis-à-vis foreign investors. Their decisions have major consequences on the public interest, specifically when it comes to protecting the environment. The growing development of environmental law and its encroachment on investment protection has triggered a series of disputes that are no longer confined to questions of nationalization or breach of contracts as before, but often revolve around State public policy measures that involve sensitive issues such as, inter alia, hazardous waste management, access to clean water, urban sprawl, protection of biodiversity. The role of ICSID tribunals and their decisions is therefore critical in the development of investment law and the debate on investment protection and environmental regulation. This study aims to analyze the role of environmental considerations in ICSID arbitral awards. Specifically, it seeks to display the main arguments retained by international tribunals and to identify the major trends in international investment arbitration vis-à-vis environmental measures.

O presente trabalho tem por objeto o fenômeno dos procedimentos paralelos em arbitragem internacional, uma realidade decorrente do aumento dos fluxos econômicos e relações comerciais entre empresas originárias de diferentes países ou entre empresas e entes estatais originários de diferentes países. Essa multiplicidade de procedimentos se traduz na existência de duas arbitragens entre as mesmas partes, sobre a mesma relação jurídica e decorrente da mesma cláusula compromissória; de duas ou mais arbitragens relativas a um grupo de contratos, com diferentes cláusulas compromissórias, envolvendo as mesmas partes; ou ainda uma arbitragem e uma ação judiciais simultâneas relativas à mesma relação jurídica, entre as mesmas partes, decorrente de cláusula compromissória e cláusula de eleição de foro respectivamente. A arbitragem de investimento, sobretudo, é campo fértil para essa proliferação de procedimentos paralelos oriundos do mesmo investimento, envolvendo investidores diretos ou seus acionistas, com base em tratados bilaterais de investimento (TBIs) ou em contratos. Entretanto, sendo a arbitragem o mecanismo de solução de controvérsias comumente utilizado em contratos internacionais, surgem questões complexas para a regulação dessa problemática. A fim de sistematizar o estudo e responder às indagações sobre a maneira de solucionar e regular os efeitos negativos dos procedimentos paralelos (por exemplo, o risco de decisões contraditórias, a multiplicidade de procedimentos contra o mesmo réu e o excessivo custo despendido nesses procedimentos), dividimos o trabalho da seguinte maneira. Preliminarmente, o tema é introduzido pela conceituação dos procedimentos paralelos e de seus tipos, conflitantes e não-conflitantes. Posteriormente, divide-se o trabalho em duas partes. Na Primeira Parte, são examinados os clássicos princípios da litispendência (Capítulo I) e da coisa julgada (Capítulo II) como medidas para evitar o risco de procedimentos paralelos entre as mesmas partes, mesma causa de pedir e mesmo pedido adotados em países de Civil Law e suas variáveis em países de Common Law, tais como forum non conveniens para a hipótese de litispendência e pleas of estoppel para os efeitos da coisa julgada. Na Segunda Parte, é analisada a possibilidade ou não da transposição da litispendência (Capítulo I) e da coisa julgada (Capítulo II) à arbitragem internacional, além de outros mecanismos mitigadores dos efeitos decorrentes dos procedimentos paralelos em arbitragem internacional, como a conexão de procedimentos e o joinder de uma nova parte; e, em arbitragem de investimento, waiver, fork in the road clause e parallel treaty arbitrations (Capítulo III). / This thesis aims to analyze the phenomenon of parallel proceedings in international arbitration, a reality that emerges from the increase in economic activity and business transactions among companies from different countries or among companies and State entities whose business places are located in different countries. This multiplicity of proceedings can be manifested in a number of scenarios: the existence of two arbitrations between the same parties concerning the same legal relationship and arising out of the same arbitration agreement; two or more arbitrations related to a group of contracts, providing for different arbitration agreements, involving the same parties; or even an arbitration and a court action based on an arbitration agreement and a choice of fórum clause, respectively, simultaneously pending related to the same legal relationship, between the same parties. Investment arbitration, especially, is a breeding ground for the proliferation of parallel proceedings arising out of the same investment, involving direct investors or their shareholders, based on bilateral investment treaties (BITs) or on contracts. However, the regulation of such problematic scenarios raises complex questions, since arbitration is the mechanism for settlement of disputes commonly used in international contracts. In order to systematize this study and to answer questions of how to overcome and regulate the negative effects of parallel proceedings (such as the risk of contradictory decisions, the multiplicity of proceedings against the same respondent and the high costs incurred in these proceedings), this thesis is divided as follows: Preliminarily, the subject matter is introduced by the definition of parallel proceedings and its different types, such as conflicting and non-conflicting parallel proceedings. Subsequently, this thesis is divided into two parts. In the First Part, the classical principles of lis pendens (Chapter I) and res judicata (Chapter II) will be examined as measures to avoid the risk of parallel proceedings between the same parties, the same cause of action and the same object as adopted in the Civil Law countries and its variations in Common Law countries, such as forum non conveniens to the hypothesis of lis pendens and pleas of estoppel to the res judicata effects. The Second Part presents an analysis of the possibility of the transposition of lis pendens (Chapter I) and res judicata (Chapter II) to the field of international arbitration, as well as other mechanisms to mitigate the effects related to parallel proceedings in international arbitration for instance, the consolidation of two arbitrations and joinder of a new party to the arbitration and, in investment arbitration, waiver, fork in the road clause and parallel treaty arbitrations (Chapter III).

O presente trabalho tem por objeto o fenômeno dos procedimentos paralelos em arbitragem internacional, uma realidade decorrente do aumento dos fluxos econômicos e relações comerciais entre empresas originárias de diferentes países ou entre empresas e entes estatais originários de diferentes países. Essa multiplicidade de procedimentos se traduz na existência de duas arbitragens entre as mesmas partes, sobre a mesma relação jurídica e decorrente da mesma cláusula compromissória; de duas ou mais arbitragens relativas a um grupo de contratos, com diferentes cláusulas compromissórias, envolvendo as mesmas partes; ou ainda uma arbitragem e uma ação judiciais simultâneas relativas à mesma relação jurídica, entre as mesmas partes, decorrente de cláusula compromissória e cláusula de eleição de foro respectivamente. A arbitragem de investimento, sobretudo, é campo fértil para essa proliferação de procedimentos paralelos oriundos do mesmo investimento, envolvendo investidores diretos ou seus acionistas, com base em tratados bilaterais de investimento (TBIs) ou em contratos. Entretanto, sendo a arbitragem o mecanismo de solução de controvérsias comumente utilizado em contratos internacionais, surgem questões complexas para a regulação dessa problemática. A fim de sistematizar o estudo e responder às indagações sobre a maneira de solucionar e regular os efeitos negativos dos procedimentos paralelos (por exemplo, o risco de decisões contraditórias, a multiplicidade de procedimentos contra o mesmo réu e o excessivo custo despendido nesses procedimentos), dividimos o trabalho da seguinte maneira. Preliminarmente, o tema é introduzido pela conceituação dos procedimentos paralelos e de seus tipos, conflitantes e não-conflitantes. Posteriormente, divide-se o trabalho em duas partes. Na Primeira Parte, são examinados os clássicos princípios da litispendência (Capítulo I) e da coisa julgada (Capítulo II) como medidas para evitar o risco de procedimentos paralelos entre as mesmas partes, mesma causa de pedir e mesmo pedido adotados em países de Civil Law e suas variáveis em países de Common Law, tais como forum non conveniens para a hipótese de litispendência e pleas of estoppel para os efeitos da coisa julgada. Na Segunda Parte, é analisada a possibilidade ou não da transposição da litispendência (Capítulo I) e da coisa julgada (Capítulo II) à arbitragem internacional, além de outros mecanismos mitigadores dos efeitos decorrentes dos procedimentos paralelos em arbitragem internacional, como a conexão de procedimentos e o joinder de uma nova parte; e, em arbitragem de investimento, waiver, fork in the road clause e parallel treaty arbitrations (Capítulo III). / This thesis aims to analyze the phenomenon of parallel proceedings in international arbitration, a reality that emerges from the increase in economic activity and business transactions among companies from different countries or among companies and State entities whose business places are located in different countries. This multiplicity of proceedings can be manifested in a number of scenarios: the existence of two arbitrations between the same parties concerning the same legal relationship and arising out of the same arbitration agreement; two or more arbitrations related to a group of contracts, providing for different arbitration agreements, involving the same parties; or even an arbitration and a court action based on an arbitration agreement and a choice of fórum clause, respectively, simultaneously pending related to the same legal relationship, between the same parties. Investment arbitration, especially, is a breeding ground for the proliferation of parallel proceedings arising out of the same investment, involving direct investors or their shareholders, based on bilateral investment treaties (BITs) or on contracts. However, the regulation of such problematic scenarios raises complex questions, since arbitration is the mechanism for settlement of disputes commonly used in international contracts. In order to systematize this study and to answer questions of how to overcome and regulate the negative effects of parallel proceedings (such as the risk of contradictory decisions, the multiplicity of proceedings against the same respondent and the high costs incurred in these proceedings), this thesis is divided as follows: Preliminarily, the subject matter is introduced by the definition of parallel proceedings and its different types, such as conflicting and non-conflicting parallel proceedings. Subsequently, this thesis is divided into two parts. In the First Part, the classical principles of lis pendens (Chapter I) and res judicata (Chapter II) will be examined as measures to avoid the risk of parallel proceedings between the same parties, the same cause of action and the same object as adopted in the Civil Law countries and its variations in Common Law countries, such as forum non conveniens to the hypothesis of lis pendens and pleas of estoppel to the res judicata effects. The Second Part presents an analysis of the possibility of the transposition of lis pendens (Chapter I) and res judicata (Chapter II) to the field of international arbitration, as well as other mechanisms to mitigate the effects related to parallel proceedings in international arbitration for instance, the consolidation of two arbitrations and joinder of a new party to the arbitration and, in investment arbitration, waiver, fork in the road clause and parallel treaty arbitrations (Chapter III).

L’arbitrage international d’investissement se voit de plus en plus confronté à des enjeux originellement hermétiques à l’arbitrage : la protection des droits de l’homme. En effet, le développement d’investissements ayant le monopole de certains services publics offense parfois les droits économiques et sociaux des populations des États hôtes. Si ces mêmes États tentent d’adopter des réglementations protectrices de ces droits, ils se voient opposer l’arbitrage d’investissement pour violations d’un traité bilatéral d’investissement. La jurisprudence en la matière est en pleine évolution, mais son étude permet de souligner d’importants problèmes de sécurité juridique dans les sentences arbitrales, ne permettant pas de garantir ces droits fondamentaux. L’accumulation de ces deux problématiques soulève alors la question de la protection de l’état de droit par l’arbitrage d’investissement, mettant à mal la légitimité de ce mécanisme alternatif de règlement des différends. / Initially outside of its scope of application, international investment arbitration is increasingly facing human rightsprotection issues. The development of investments dealing with public services has led to violations of socio-economic rights for host States’ populations. When States tried to adopt regulations toprotect those rights, they were brought to arbitration for breaching their Bilateral Investment Treaty obligations. The human rights case law in investment arbitration is developing and quickly evolving. Nevertheless, its analysis enables to highlight important legal certainty issues, rendering difficult the protection of economic, social,and cultural rights. Facing this, the legitimacy of the system is disputed and the protection of the rule of law by international investment arbitration is seriously challenged.

Cette thèse porte sur deux espaces juridiques différents : celui des droits de l’homme et celui des investissements étrangers. Le centre de gravité de notre recherche étant défini géographiquement en Amérique latine, le but est d’analyser l’articulation de ces deux espaces juridiques en identifiant et étudiant la circulation normative dans sa dimension horizontale, c'est-à-dire reposant sur le cadre normatif international. L’interaction entre le droit international des investissements et les droits de l’homme est une problématique récente, qui a commencé à attirer l’attention de la communauté internationale et a mis en évidence les avantages et les limites de leur articulation. En effet, les États sont tenus de protéger, respecter et garantir tous les droits de l’homme indépendamment des classifications dont ils font l’objet. Concomitamment, les Etats doivent aussi suivre les obligations relatives aux investissements étrangers déduites des accords en la matière. Le respect de ces deux types d’obligations peut opérer sans poser de problèmes de coordination, ou, au contraire, dans certaines hypothèses, une concurrence de ces deux types d’engagements peut apparaître. De ce fait, l’identification de leurs points de rencontre ainsi que de leurs points d’achoppement devra être menée pour atteindre l’objectif principal de notre analyse défini par l’articulation de ces deux domaines du droit international. La pratique témoigne des implications que les activités d’investissements ont de temps en temps vis-à-vis des droits de la personne, ce qui invite à analyser l’interaction entre ces deux régimes juridiques. C’est ainsi que quelques nouveaux modèles de traités d’investissements commencent à mentionner expressément la protection des droits de l’homme. De la même manière, l’arbitrage international est de plus en plus occupé par des questions concernant les points de rencontre et d’achoppement entre les deux régimes. Ainsi, la jurisprudence arbitrale traite la question, mais souvent de façon timide et hétérogène, et la plupart du temps par le biais d’interprétations privilégiant la protection des droits de l’investisseur sur toute autre question relevant des droits des différentes personnes affectées par l’investissement. La lecture de cette même situation dans l’enceinte contentieuse des droits de l’homme du système interaméricain est souvent divergente, car ceux-ci sont appliqués et interprétés en concordance avec des principes spécifiques et privilégiant l’essence humaniste qui distingue la matière. Ces divergences d’interprétation risquent de s’approfondir du fait de la spécificité des structures régionales participant à la création et au développement du droit international des investissements et des droits de l’homme. En Amérique latine, région reconnue pour ses contrastes, des approches régionales particulières se sont développées autour de la question du traitement et de la protection des étrangers par le biais des doctrines Calvo et Drago, ainsi que de l’interprétation régionale de plusieurs droits dans le cadre du système interaméricain de protection des droits de l’homme. Ces approches particulières ont bâti des traditions juridiques latino-américaines, dans les matières respectives, qui ont évolué dans le temps et se confrontent avec le cadre juridique international de l’investissement étranger. Cette situation de possible fragmentation juridique se nourrit de la création des nouveaux centres de décision et d’institutions régionaux comme l’UNASUR, l’ALBA et plus récemment la CELAC. De ce fait, elle nous invite à approfondir la question de l’articulation des régimes juridiques en l’étudiant sous le prisme de la tradition juridique latino-américaine. / This thesis addresses two different legal areas: Human Rights and foreign investment protection. The focal point of our research is Latin America, and the objective is to analyze the articulation of the above-mentioned legal areas, while identifying and studying the circulation of legal norms in their horizontal dimension, in other words, in the framework of international law. The interaction of foreign investment law and human rights is recent, and is a subject that has begun to attract the attention of the international community and to display the advantages and limits in their articulation In fact, States have to protect, respect and guarantee Human Rights, regardless of the classification they are subject to. At the same time, States must also comply with their obligations to protect foreign investment in their territories derived from international treaties that they are part of. Compliance with these two types of obligations can take place without implying any coordination problems, but in other cases, it could also cause these obligations to clash. We will aim to identify common points in both regimes, as well as conflict areas in order to determine the articulation between these two areas of international law. In fact, practice reflects the implications that investment activities sometimes have on human rights, and invites to analyze the interactions between these two regimes. This is how some new model agreements promoting and protecting foreign investment have begun to expressly refer the protection of human rights. In the same way, international arbitration has been increasingly dealing with questions concerning the common areas, as well as the diverging points of these two regimes. In effect, arbitral jurisprudence deals with this interaction, but often times in a timid and heterogeneous way, and in the majority of the cases biased by interpretations that privilege the rights of investors over any other question relative to rights of other persons affected by the investment. In light of human rights jurisprudence, this situation often receives a different understanding, due to the fact that human rights are interpreted and applied in accordance with specific principles, and placing greater importance on the humanistic essence that distinguishes the area. These differences in the interpretation may deepen, taking into account the specificity of regional structures that participate in the creation and development of international investment law and international human rights law. Concerning Latin America, bearing in mind the contrasts that depict the region, it has featured particular approaches with regard to the treatment of foreign investors, greatly influenced by the Calvo and Drago doctrines, as well as by regional interpretations within the framework of the Inter-American system of human rights. These interpretations have built Latin American legal traditions in the matter that have evolved over time, and can be evaluated against the international investment juridical framework. This landscape of possible legal fragmentation is nourished by the creations of new decision-making centers and regional institutions such as the UNASUR, ALBA, and more recently the CELAC. This question calls us to deepen the study of the articulation of these two legal regimes, under the prism of the Latin American legal tradition.