TY - JOUR
T1 - Power and persuasion in investment treaty interpretation
T2 - The dual role of states
AU - Roberts, Anthea
PY - 2010/4
Y1 - 2010/4
N2 - States entering into investment treaties establish dual roles for themselves as treaty parties (with an interest in interpretation) and actual or potential respondents in investor-state disputes (with an interest in avoiding liability). By viewing states primarily as respondents rather than also as treaty parties, investment tribunals often ignore the relevance and persuasiveness for interpretation of those parties subsequent agreements and practice. The approach proposed here seeks to recalibrate interpretive power between states and tribunals by increasing consideration of such evidence.
AB - States entering into investment treaties establish dual roles for themselves as treaty parties (with an interest in interpretation) and actual or potential respondents in investor-state disputes (with an interest in avoiding liability). By viewing states primarily as respondents rather than also as treaty parties, investment tribunals often ignore the relevance and persuasiveness for interpretation of those parties subsequent agreements and practice. The approach proposed here seeks to recalibrate interpretive power between states and tribunals by increasing consideration of such evidence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955342911&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5305/amerjintelaw.104.2.0179
DO - 10.5305/amerjintelaw.104.2.0179
M3 - Article
SN - 0002-9300
VL - 104
SP - 179
EP - 225
JO - American Journal of International Law
JF - American Journal of International Law
IS - 2
ER -