Unjust enrichment in investor–State arbitration: A principled limit on compensation for future income from fossil fuels

8Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

If States take seriously the Paris Agreement's mitigation goal by phasing out the use of fossil fuels in energy production, investor–State arbitration could allow claimants to recoup lost value. In awards of compensation, tribunals typically apply forward-looking, income-based valuation methods to quantify future cash flows. But such methods may lead to upward redistribution of wealth and expansion of fossil fuel production. This article recalls the prohibition against unjust enrichment as a general principle of law that complements the obligation to make full reparation by ensuring that any compensation does not undermine some legally recognized allocation of benefits and burdens. The Paris Agreement's distributive scheme may thus impose a principled limit on compensation for future income from stranded fossil fuel assets when a tribunal determines the appropriate method of valuation, thereby ensuring that investor–State arbitration does not enrich claimants to the detriment of State capacity in climate mitigation and adaptation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hailes, O. (2023). Unjust enrichment in investor–State arbitration: A principled limit on compensation for future income from fossil fuels. Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law, 32(2), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12483

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free