Jurisdiction and admissibility in investment arbitration: The practice and the theory

Research output: Book/ReportBook

Abstract / Description of output

This is the first half of a two-part essay on jurisdiction and admissibility in investment arbitration. It focuses on the arbitration practice, whilst the second part sets these concepts in the wider framework of public international law litigation. This essay maps the objections to the tribunal’s jurisdiction (by ratio: materiae, temporis, loci and personae) and the claim’s admissibility. It offers some preliminary conclusions: in certain areas there still is no consensus; tribunals are inclined to characterise objections as jurisdictional, and rarely resort to admissibility; findings of inadmissibility draw a judgment on the claimant or the claim’s propriety (whilst jurisdictional decisions typically eschew value-judgment); tribunals failed to distinguish jurisdiction from admissibility. These findings are further explored, within a wider theoretical context, in the second part of the essay.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages193
Volume1
Edition3-4
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 27 Mar 2018

Publication series

NameBrill Research Perspectives in International Investment Law and Arbitration
PublisherBrill
ISSN (Print)2405-576X

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • admissibility
  • competence
  • Jurisdiction
  • Investment Arbitration
  • ratione materiae
  • ratione temporis
  • ratione personae
  • ratione loci
  • general principles of International Law
  • foreign investment

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Jurisdiction and admissibility in investment arbitration: The practice and the theory'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this