"As the book clearly explains, there are situations in which questions of contract law need to be examined by investment tribunals - mainly as preliminary or incidental questions, to determine issues such as contract liability or breach of contract, that in turn are assumed as a basis for the issues of investment law in dispute"--

This book demonstrates how the public international law character of investment treaty arbitration has impacted on the dispute settlement procedure.

Although the idea of arbitral tribunal's mandate is in everyday use in the international arbitration scholarship, it remains an elusive concept lacking any legal definition. Often associated with other notions such as the tribunal's mission, powers, authority or even jurisdiction, the meaning of arbitral tribunal's mandate remains a moving target and escapes easy classification. Yet, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, a non-compliance with the arbitral tribunal's mandate provides a basis for a challenge of the arbitral award at the post-award stage (either during setting aside proceedings or at the enforcement stage). Since the concept of the tribunal's mandate is vague, it attracts, in turn, a broad interpretation of the ground leading to a frustration of the fundamental value of arbitration - the finality of the arbitral award. It is therefore essential to determine how the national courts review arbitral awards on the basis of 'excess of mandate' and consequently in what instances they accept the argument that the tribunal acted in violation of its mandate. This study aims at recognizing the similarities and differences of the 'excess of mandate' type of challenges in selected legal systems (namely the UNCITRAL Model Law, France, England, the U.S. and the New York Convention). Looking through the eyes of what the selected legal systems consider to be an 'excess of mandate' allows us to identify common features and contributes to a better understanding of the concept of the arbitral tribunal's mandate by arbitrators, judges and legal practitioners alike. Accordingly, this research adds a building block to the definition of the tribunal's mandate.

This indispensable book offers a concise comparative introduction to international commercial arbitration (ICA). With reference to recent case law from leading jurisdictions and up-to-date rules revisions, International Commercial Arbitration offers a thorough overview of the issues raised in arbitration, from the time of drafting of the arbitration clause to the rendering of the arbitral award and the post-award stage.

Is it Time for a Regime Change? Protecting International Energy Investments against Political Risk. The 2013 seventh annual Juris investment arbitration conference put in issue the special role of international energy projects in the development of investor-state arbitration. It is currently one of the most active sectors of investor-state arbitration. The “facts” of the energy sector therefore are particularly well-developed in international jurisprudence. The similarities in the applicable law of investment protection between the energy sector and other sectors tend to hide from view what our panelists repeatedly uncovered: it is the facts of energy disputes that significantly set them apart. The concerns of sovereign dominion over national energy production and the protection of foreign investors in the energy sector against stranding large investments served as a key point of departure for discussions. The four questions that the Conference addressed include: The Energy Sector, Investment Arbitration and the ECT: Carving out a Special Regime? Energy Contracts and BITS – Is it Fair and Equitable to be Under the Umbrella? Mulitparty Investor Disputes in the Energy Sector – Preclusion, Consolidation or Free-For-All? Measure by Measure? Calculating Damages in Energy Disputes The discussion and debate that followed is provided in this book and sure to be of tremendous value to the international business lawyer, litigation specialist or trade and investment law policy expert.

Ex Aequo et Bono as a Response to the 'Over-Judicialisation' of International Commercial Arbitration' investigates significant divergence in the understanding of ex aequo et bono across state jurisdictions and international arbitration institutions and analyses the core trends in actual legal practice and in thinking about the principle. Despite its many distinguished proponents over time, ex aequo et bono - the idea of deciding disputes on the basis of what an adjudicator regards as fair and equitable - has failed to take hold in international commercial arbitration (ICA). Formalisation and fossilisation of arbitral procedure, as manifested in the increasing use of litigation-style practice, unfortunately reign instead. This bold and challenging book argues that parties to an arbitration should be more willing for their cross-border disputes to be decided (and arbitrators should be more prepared to decide those disputes) in accordance with broad principles of equity and fairness, rather than by strict adherence to technical rules of law.