TR
EN
ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS
Abstract
Over the last few decades, one of the most contentious issues of the international investment law has been the interpretation of the ‘umbrella clauses’. Since the umbrella clauses are generally vague, short and hidden in international investment agreements, the interpretation of the clause is in a controversial position and thereby having been subject to the scholarly interest. Should umbrella clauses in international investment agreements be enforceable by arbitration tribunals? Or to what extent investor’s claims stemming from a contractual bre-ach could be enforceable by arbitration tribunals? SGS v Pakistan and SGS v Philippines have addressed these questions and reached opposite decisions. This article aims to examine the contradictory arbitral deci-sions and to discuss broad and restrictive approaches. The article begins with a brief review of umbrella clauses. Then, it analyses leading arbitral cases with the help of scholar views in order to shed the light on critical aspects of the issue.
Keywords
References
- SGS v. Pakistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/13 (6 Aug 2003), https://www.italaw.com/cases/1009, 07.03.2023.
- SGS v. Philippines, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/6 (29 Jan 2004), https://www.italaw.com/cases/1018, 07.03.2023.
- Joy Mining Machinery Limited v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/11, Award on Jurisdiction, (6 August 2004), https://www.italaw.com/cases/590, 07.03.2023.
- Salini Costruttori S.p.A. & Italstrade S.p.A. v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/13, Decision on Jurisdiction (9 Nov 2004), https://www.italaw.com/cases/954, 07.03.2023.
- CMS Gas Transmission Co. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8 (12 May 2005), https://www.italaw.com/cases/288, 07.03.2023.
- Eureko v. Poland, Partial Award, (19 Aug 2005), https://www. ita-law.com/cases/412, 07.03.2023.
- Noble Ventures v. Romania, ICSID Case no. ARB/01/11 (12 Oct 2005), https://www.italaw.com/cases/747, 07.03.2023.
- El Paso Energy v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/15, Decision on Jurisdiction (27 April 2006), https://www.italaw.com /cases/382, 07.03.2023.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
International Arbitration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Publication Date
April 30, 2024
Submission Date
March 10, 2023
Acceptance Date
March 18, 2024
Published in Issue
Year 2024 Volume: 19 Number: 1
APA
Günarslan, B. F. (2024). ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS. Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 85-107. https://doi.org/10.58820/eruhfd.1475561
AMA
1.Günarslan BF. ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS. ERUHFD. 2024;19(1):85-107. doi:10.58820/eruhfd.1475561
Chicago
Günarslan, Banu Fatma. 2024. “ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS”. Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19 (1): 85-107. https://doi.org/10.58820/eruhfd.1475561.
EndNote
Günarslan BF (April 1, 2024) ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS. Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19 1 85–107.
IEEE
[1]B. F. Günarslan, “ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS”, ERUHFD, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 85–107, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.58820/eruhfd.1475561.
ISNAD
Günarslan, Banu Fatma. “ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS”. Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19/1 (April 1, 2024): 85-107. https://doi.org/10.58820/eruhfd.1475561.
JAMA
1.Günarslan BF. ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS. ERUHFD. 2024;19:85–107.
MLA
Günarslan, Banu Fatma. “ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS”. Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 19, no. 1, Apr. 2024, pp. 85-107, doi:10.58820/eruhfd.1475561.
Vancouver
1.Banu Fatma Günarslan. ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS. ERUHFD. 2024 Apr. 1;19(1):85-107. doi:10.58820/eruhfd.1475561