This text analyses the conventional and customary framework of the fair and equitable treatment clauses commonly found in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and charts how these clauses have become norms of customary international law.

Forty years after its formation, the regime established by the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) is thriving. ICSID's new prominence however has come at a price. Faced with sharply increasing numbers of investment claims, arbitral tribunals have been forced to re-think old, and confront new, problems. The contributions to this volume take stock of four decades of ICSID jurisprudence and assess some of the most pressing challenges facing the system of international investment protection. The topics covered include: --- the role of NGOs in ICSID dispute settlement --- the debate about an investment appellate court --- the overlap between investment law and WTO/human rights law --- recent trends in the jurisprudence on fair and equitable treatment as well as the nationality of claimants.

Investment protection treaties generally include, in one form or another, the obligation to treat investments fairly and equitably. This book examines the relationship between this obligation and the minimum standard that can be found in customary international law, tracing the history of both concepts, their differences and similarities.

The fair and equitable treatment (‘FET’) standard is a type of protection found in BITs which has become in the last decades one of the most controversial provisions examined by arbitral tribunals. This book first examines the interaction between the ‘minimum standard of treatment’ (MST) and the FET standard and the question why States started referring to the former in their BITs. It also addresses the question whether the FET should be considered as an autonomous standard of protection under BITs. This book also examines the controversial proposition that the FET standard should now be considered as a rule of customary international law. I will show that while the practice of States to include FET clauses in their BITs can be considered as general, widespread and representative, it remains that it is not uniform and consistent enough for the standard to have crystallised into a customary rule. States also lack the necessary opinio juris when including the clause in their BITs.

"In recent years, the concept of fair and equitable treatment has assumed prominence in investment relations between States. While the earliest proposals that made reference to this standard of treatment for investment are contained in various multilateral efforts in the period immediately following World War II, the bulk of the State practice incorporating the standard is to be found in bilateral investment treaties which have become a central feature in international investment relations. In essence, the fair and equitable standard provides a yardstick by which relations between foreign direct investors and Governments of capital-importing countries may be assessed. It also acts as a signal from capital-importing countries, for it indicates, at the very least, a State's willingness to accommodate foreign capital on terms that take into account the interests of the investor in fairness and equity."--Provided by publisher.

Since the entry into force of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, several arbitral tribunals have rendered awards dealing with claims of breach of Article 1105. Some of these awards have been very controversial and have had a tremendous impact on the development of the concept of fair and equitable treatment (FET) and the evolution of international investment law. Yet, in spite of the fundamental importance of these awards, no comprehensive study had been undertaken to determine the meaning and the content of the FET standard under NAFTA Article 1105. This bookand’s systematic analysis of the provision and its case law fills this analytical gap. Because Article 1105 is in many ways different from typical FET clauses contained within most investment treaties, the author examines the particular parameters under which it must be interpreted. He also analyzes how these specific features have influenced NAFTA tribunalsand’ interpretation of the provision, and how their assessments differ from awards rendered by other tribunals outside NAFTA. Among the issues treated in the course of the analysis are the following: the origin, development, nature and content of the concept of the and‘minimum standard of treatmentand’ and its interaction with the FET standard; the specific parameters under which Article 1105 must be interpreted, including contextual elements such as subsequent agreement and practice between the NAFTA Parties on matters of interpretation; the context in which the Free Trade Commission issued its Note of Interpretation in 2001 and how NAFTA tribunals have applied it; whether or not the concepts of legitimate expectations, transparency, arbitrary conduct, discriminatory conduct, good faith, denial of justice, and due process have been considered by NAFTA tribunals as specific elements of protection to be accorded to investors under Article 1105; the many facets of these elements and the threshold of severity that NAFTA tribunals have required for finding a breach of Article 1105; the interaction between Article 1105 and other NAFTA provisions on national treatment, Most-Favored-Nation treatment, and expropriation; and how NAFTA tribunals have assessed damages for breach of Article 1105. This comprehensive guide to NAFTA case law on Article 1105 is an important contribution to the on-going controversial debate about the scope and content of the FET standard under international law. It will be of great interest to counsel for investors and States as well as to arbitrators, academics and anyone interested in investor-State arbitration.

This book moves from the circumstance whereby currently the obligation to provide fair and equitable treatment (FET) to foreign investments is included in the majority of international investment agreements and has proved to be the most invoked standard in investor-State arbitration. Hence, it is no overstatement to describe this standard as the basic norm of international investment law. Yet both its meaning and normative basis continue to be shrouded in ambiguity and, as a consequence, to inspire a considerable number of interpretations by legal writers. The book’s precise aim is to unravel such ambiguity, arguing from the idea that FET has become part of the fabric of general international law, but has done so by means of a source somewhat neglected in legal doctrine. This being the category of general principles peculiar to a certain field of international law, i.e. those principles having their own foundations in the international legal order itself, but which, through the mediation of the judge, end up being shaped according to the features typical of a specific normative field. The book, as well as having a solid theoretical backdrop as its basis, offers a careful and critical analysis of pertinent case law, and will prove useful to both scholars and practitioners. Fulvio Maria Palombino is Professor of International Law at the Law Department of the University of Naples Federico II and a member of the Executive Board of the European Society of International Law.