Search Results

This chapter analyses the investment treaty provisions most likely to be invoked by investors to redress conflict-related losses, notably the full protection and security provision (FPS) and the armed conflict clause. First, it examines the scope of the FPS standard, focusing on ‘police powers’ and ‘due diligence’ as two concepts that help demarcate the obligation under the provision. Second, it considers different types of armed conflict clauses and addresses the jurisprudential inconsistencies, in particular with regard to their relationship with FPS. Finally, the chapter looks into other treaty provisions (expropriation and fair and equitable treatment), arguing that investors’ expectations as to their protections will be likely assessed in light of the conflict crisis.

This chapter provides an overview of the jurisdictional relationship between international courts under general public international law. It is based on a distinction between conflicts of jurisdiction in the narrow sense and parallel proceedings and explores them in turn. Conflicts of jurisdiction are classified as conflicts between treaty norms, which necessitates a definition of treaty conflicts and a discussion of ways to resolve them (lex posterior, lex specialis, conflict clauses, abuse of rights, etc.) with the specificities of jurisdictional conflicts in mind. Concluding that not all conflicts of jurisdiction can be resolved on the basis of positive international law, the remainder of the chapter is dedicated to parallel proceedings, in particular res judicata and lis alibi pendens.

This chapter focusses on how ‘Free Trade Agreements’ (FTAs) fit within the existing multilateral framework, primarily with the Trade Related Aspects of International Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement which most FTAs take as basis and benchmark from which the contracting parties modify rules among another (inter-se). In this context, the most prominent issue is the effect the continuous strengthening of the standards of intellectual property (IP) protection and enforcement has on the optional provisions and flexibilities of the TRIPS Agreement. The chapter examines whether and how the TRIPS addresses such further increases in protection and enforcement. It also looks at conflict clauses in FTAs and how they perceive their relation with the multilateral IP rules, especially the TRIPS Agreement. The principal question here is whether rule-relations within the international IP system are still primarily determined by harmonious interpretation — or if conflict resolution rather functions by choosing one rule over another.