Presenting international foreign investment law in historical, political and economic contexts, this book embraces all recent developments.

"Presents the results of a questionnaire-based survey circulated to the main players in the petroleum sector, revealing actual existing contractual risk management techniques and showing a true picture of the political risk situation in the petroleum sector"--P. [4] of cover.

The energy industry is a key source of growth stimulation for developing states. Understandably, developing states are eager to enter into petroleum investment contracts with international investors, with the expectation that this will benefit their countries. The domestic law of some developing states provides a welcoming investment environment in the form of guarantees and stability, while other states provide these opportunities by agreeing to investment contracts or treaties drafted by international organisations established to facilitate such agreements. This book identifies the political risks, particularly of indirect expropriation, that arise from the unilateral actions of host governments during the lifespan of energy investment projects. Focusing on stabilisation clauses as a political risk management tool, this research-based study draws on comparative empirical evidence from Turkey and Azerbaijan to determine what influences host states to consent to the insertion of stabilisation clauses in long-term host government agreements. Proposing a framework for the role to be played by both internal forces and external forces, it examines political regimes and state guarantees to foreign investors in Azerbaijan and Turkey from a comparative perspective, assessing how effective internal factors in Azerbaijan and Turkey are in facilitating contractual stability in their energy investment projects. Providing a comprehensive analysis of stabilisation clauses and the internal and external factors that compel host states to commit to them, this book will appeal to practitioners, students and scholars in international investment law and energy law.

Extending this analysis of their acclaimed 1975 work, Weston and Lillich (with the addition of David Bederman) bring the log of international claims up to 1995. This volume provides authoritative translations and annotations of lump sum agreements concluded between 1975 and 1995 (and hitherto unavailable agreements concluded before 1975). Detailed commentary includes analysis of such issues as eligible claimants, substantive bases of claims, and standards of compensation under the agreements. The authors leave no doubt of the continued importance of lump sum agreements to international claims practice and the dynamic law of State responsibility. Published under the auspices of the Procedural Aspects of International Law Institute (PAIL).For more information about PAIL please go to pail-institute.org. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

This book deals with expropriation and other measures affecting property rights as set out in the awards of the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, and thus examines the relation between general international law and the lex specialis, viz., the provisions of the Algiers Declarations and the Treaty of Amity between the Governments of Iran and the United States. It studies what rights have been considered as property rights capable of being independently expropriated or affected by other measures, and what rights have not been so qualified, although they might have been considered as forming an element of valuation. Furthermore, the liability and attributability issues are discussed, as are the methods of compensation and of valuation.

After the Second World War, the dissolution of European empires and emergence of 'new states' in Asia, Africa, Oceania, and elsewhere necessitated large-scale structural changes in international legal order. In Completing Humanity, Umut Özsu recounts the history of the struggle to transform international law during the twentieth century's last major wave of decolonization. Commencing in 1960, with the General Assembly's landmark decolonization resolution, and concluding in 1982, with the close of the third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea and the onset of the Latin American debt crisis, the book examines the work of elite international lawyers from newly independent states alongside that of international law specialists from 'First World' and socialist states. A study in modifications to legal theory and doctrine over time, it documents and reassesses post-1945 decolonization from the standpoint of the 'Third World' and the jurists who elaborated and defended its interests.

This book offers insights into how international investment law (IIL) has frustrated states’ protection of human rights in Latin America, and IIL has generally abstained from dealing with inter-regime frictions. In these circumstances, this study not only argues that IIL should be an object of contention and debate (‘politicisation’). It also contends that Latin American countries have traditionally been the frontrunners in the politicisation of international legal instruments protecting foreign investment, questioning whether the paradigms informing their claims’ articulation are adequate to frame this debate. It demonstrates that the so-called ‘right to regulate’ is the paradigm now prevalently used to challenge IIL, but that it is inadequate from a human rights perspective. Hence, the book calls for a re-politicisation of IIL in Latin America through a re-conceptualization of how states’ regulation of foreign investment is understood under international human rights law, which entails viewing it as an international duty. After determining what the ‘duty to regulate’ constitutes in relation to the right to water and indigenous peoples’ right to lands based on human rights doctrine, the book analyses the extent to which Latin American countries are currently re-politicising IIL through an articulation of this international duty, and arbitral tribunals’ responses to their argumentative strategies. Based on these findings, the book not only proposes investment treaties’ reform to anchor the ‘duty to regulate’ paradigm in IIL, and in the process, to induce tribunals’ engagement with human rights arguments when they come to underpin respondent states’ defences in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). In addition, drawing upon the (now likely defunct) idea of creating a regional ISDS tribunal, the book briefly reflects on options available to such a tribunal in terms of dealing with troubling normative/institutional interactions between regimes during ISDS proceedings.