International law on sovereign defaults is underdeveloped because States have largely refrained from adjudicating disputes arising out of public debt. The looming new wave of sovereign defaults is likely to shift dispute resolution away from national courts to international tribunals and transform the current regime for restructuring sovereign debt. Michael Waibel assesses how international tribunals balance creditor claims and sovereign capacity to pay across time. The history of adjudicating sovereign defaults internationally over the last 150 years offers a rich repository of experience for future cases: US state defaults, quasi-receiverships in the Dominican Republic and Ottoman Empire, the Venezuela Preferential Case, the Soviet repudiation in 1917, the League of Nations, the World War Foreign Debt Commission, Germany's 30-year restructuring after 1918 and ICSID arbitration on Argentina's default in 2001. The remarkable continuity in international practice and jurisprudence suggests avenues for building durable institutions capable of resolving future sovereign defaults.

The modern tendency to restrict international arbitration to matters of commerce and investment is succumbing to a renewed recognition of the original impetus for dispute resolution by arbitration – i.e., matters of public international law, most importantly the settlement of disputes that pose a threat of international conflict. Recent developments suggest a renaissance of public international arbitration, most clearly manifested in the present flourishing of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), the oldest existing dispute settlement institution in international law. As the calls for the development of new and more appropriate methods for dispute settlement in international law increased during the 1990s, the PCA undertook a structural reform and is today a vital forum for dispute settlement, with scores of arbitrations currently pending under its auspices. This book – the most comprehensive study of the institution to date, covering its history, its present status, and its future prospects – proves the PCA’s contemporary relevance within the international dispute settlement framework. Among aspects of the PCA’s work covered are the following: how public international arbitration functions in comparison to other means available for dispute settlement in international law; the PCA’s historical contributions to the current dispute settlement framework; arbitrations between a state and a non-state actor that are in whole or in part governed by public international law; the fields in which public international arbitration plays a revived role; the PCA’s present-day institutional framework and its current activities; the prospects for public international arbitration and the PCA in the dispute settlement framework of the twenty-first century; and proposals to increase the PCA’s activities in future and to sustain and enhance the institution’s ongoing revitalization. A very useful Practitioner’s Guide provides an overview of the PCA’s various services and the best means of accessing them, along with a summary of the key provisions of the new PCA Arbitration Rules 2012. For lawyers who are involved in dispute resolution proceedings, there can be little doubt about the PCA’s relevance. This book is at once an academic work, indispensable for scholars of the institution, and a practical guide that will be a required addition to the libraries of counsel, arbitrators, and others involved in dispute resolution proceedings conducted at the PCA.

"International law on sovereign defaults is underdeveloped because States have largely refrained from adjudicating disputes arising out of public debt. The looming new wave of sovereign defaults is likely to shift dispute resolution away from national courts to international tribunals and transform the current regime for restructuring sovereign debt. Michael Waibel assesses how international tribunals balance creditor claims and sovereign capacity to pay across time. The history of adjudicating sovereign defaults internationally over the last 150 years offers a rich repository of experience for future cases: US state defaults, quasi-receiverships in the Dominican Republic and Ottoman Empire, the Venezuela Preferential Case, the Soviet repudiation in 1917, the League of Nations, the World War Foreign Debt Commission, Germany's 30-year restructuring after 1918 and ICSID arbitration on Argentina's default in 2001. The remarkable continuity in international practice and jurisprudence suggests avenues for building durable institutions capable of resolving future sovereign defaults"--

International investment law is in a state of evolution. With the advent of investor-State arbitration in the latter part of the twentieth century - and its exponential growth over the last decade - new levels of complexity, uncertainty and substantive expansion are emerging. States continue to enter into investment treaties and the number of investor-State arbitration claims continues to rise. At the same time, the various participants in investment treaty arbitration are faced with increasingly difficult issues concerning the fundamental character of the investment treaty regime, the role of the actors in international investment law, the new significance of procedure in the settlement of disputes and the emergence of cross-cutting issues. Bringing together established scholars and practitioners, as well as members of a new generation of international investment lawyers, this volume examines these developments and provides a balanced assessment of the challenges being faced in the field.

2 Dispute Settlement Under UNCLOS

The Oxford ILDC online database, an online collection of domestic court decisions which apply international law, has been providing scholars with insights for many years. This ILDC Casebook is the perfect companion, introducing key court decisions with brief introductory and connecting texts. An ideal text for practitioners, judged, government officials, as well as for students on international law courses, the ILDC Casebook explains the theories and doctrines underlying the use by domestic courts of international law, and illustrates the key importance of domestic courts in the development of international law.