Why Investment Arbitration and Not Domestic Courts? The Origins of the Modern Investment Dispute Resolution System, Criticism, and Future Outlook

2Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This chapter reviews the existing criticism of investor-State dispute settlement in relation to the role of domestic courts. In essence, this criticism contends that the IIA investment arbitration regime does not account for situations in which domestic courts offer adequate access to justice and discriminates against domestic investors by granting only (certain) foreign investors a privileged procedural track. In order to place such criticism in a broader context, the study provides an overview of the historical, economic, and political reasons that underpin the creation of the current investment dispute settlement system and discusses whether these motivations still justify the existence of an international system of investment dispute resolution, whether in the form of arbitration or standing adjudicatory bodies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kaufmann-Kohler, G., & Potestà, M. (2020). Why Investment Arbitration and Not Domestic Courts? The Origins of the Modern Investment Dispute Resolution System, Criticism, and Future Outlook. In European Yearbook of International Economic Law (pp. 7–29). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44164-7_2

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