Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Notion of investment under the ICSID Arbitration: A jurisdictional dilemma between subjective and objective approaches||Authors:||Nasiruddeen Muhamad||Issue Date:||2017||Journal:||International Conference on Advances in Business, Management and Law (ICABML) 2017||Conference:||University of Dubai (UD) -International Conference on Advances in Business Management and Law- 2017||Abstract:||The notion of Investment is one of the most controversial issues trailing the dispute settlement mechanism of International Center for Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID). One notable issue surrounding the controversy is identifying an exact definition of investment for the purposes of ICSID Jurisdiction. While some tribunals tend to give effect to the agreement of the parties contained in their contracts or the underlying bilateral investment treaty as giving rise to the ICSID jurisdiction by consent, others tend to subject parties consent into a filtering mechanism based on a certain developed criteria. The aim of the paper is to add clarity to the corpus juris of investment treaty arbitration and provide guidance to the investment treaty tribunals regarding the determination of notion of investment. In doing so, the paper typifies the problem with the notable case of MHS v Malaysia. It then analyzes the two approaches from subjective and objective perspectives. The paper concludes with the proposition that ICSID notion of investment may not necessary lie with either of the two approaches.||URI:||http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12216/208||DOI:||10.30585/icabml-cp.v1i1.16|
|Appears in Collections:||Conference Papers|
Show full item record
checked on Oct 20, 2020
Items in Corepaedia are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.