File #2852: "2020_Book_ApplicationOfMost-Favoured-Nat.pdf"

2020_Book_ApplicationOfMost-Favoured-Nat.pdf

Testo

1|Preface|7
1|Acknowledgements|9
1|Contents|11
1|About the Author|15
1|1 Introduction|16
2|1.1 Overview of the Topic|17
2|1.2 Definition and Potential Implications of MFN|21
3|1.2.1 Definition|21
3|1.2.2 Potential Implications|22
2|1.3 Background of Issues Related to MFN in IIAs|23
2|1.4 Scholarships on MFN|26
3|1.4.1 Scope of MFN in General|26
3|1.4.2 Scope of MFN Relating to Substantive Benefits|27
3|1.4.3 Scope of MFN Relating to Procedural and Jurisdictional Issues|28
3|1.4.4 Interpretative Approaches|29
2|1.5 Scope of the Book|30
2|1.6 Methodology and Sources|33
2|1.7 Conclusion|36
2|References|38
1|2 Evolution of MFN Treatment and Drafting Trends in the Older Generation of IIAs|40
2|2.1 Introduction|41
2|2.2 Evolution and Insights from the Evolution of MFN|43
3|2.2.1 Evolution|43
3|2.2.2 Insights from the Evolution|57
2|2.3 Drafting Trends of MFN in the Older Generation of IIAs and Insights from the Trends|62
3|2.3.1 Incorporation of MFN in Different Provisions of IIAs|62
3|2.3.2 Subject Matters of and Exceptions to MFN Provisions in IIAs|63
3|2.3.3 Drafting Trends of General MFN Clauses in Older Generation IIAs|69
3|2.3.4 Insights from the Drafting Trends in the Older Generation IIAs|78
2|2.4 Conclusion|79
2|References|81
1|3 Principles of Interpretation|85
2|3.1 Introduction|85
2|3.2 Rules of Interpretation Embodied in the VCLT and a Comparison of the Interpretative Approaches|87
3|3.2.1 Applicability of the VCLT|87
3|3.2.2 Rules of Interpretation Embodied in Articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT|88
3|3.2.3 Different Interpretative Approaches: Which One Should Prevail?|90
2|3.3 MFN Clauses Through the Lens of the 1978 Draft Articles by the ILC|93
3|3.3.1 Relevance of the Draft Articles in Interpreting IIA MFN Clauses|93
3|3.3.2 How Did the ILC Perceive MFN in the 1978 Draft Articles?|94
2|3.4 How to Determine the Scope of MFN Clauses in IIAs: Insights from the 1978 Draft Articles on MFN and VCLT|100
3|3.4.1 Insights from the 1978 Draft Articles|100
3|3.4.2 Insights from the VCLT|107
2|3.5 Conclusion|113
2|References|114
1|4 Application of MFN to the Substantive Benefits|116
2|4.1 Introduction|117
2|4.2 Principles Emerging from the Key Arbitral Decisions on the Application of MFN to Substantive Benefits|120
3|4.2.1 Multilateralisation Not Unrestricted|121
3|4.2.2 Limitations of MFN|140
3|4.2.3 Application of MFN to Substantive Benefits May Have Implications for Dispute Settlement|151
3|4.2.4 Assessment of Less Favourable Treatment and Similarity of Circumstances Needed|151
2|4.3 When Should MFN Apply to the Substantive Benefits?|154
2|4.4 Applying MFN to the Substantive Benefits: Implications for the Developing Countries|155
2|4.5 Conclusion|157
2|References|158
1|5 Application of MFN to Procedural Prerequisites to Arbitration|159
2|5.1 Introduction|159
2|5.2 Principles Emerging from the Arbitral Decisions that Allowed or Rejected MFN to Procedural Prerequisites|161
3|5.2.1 Should MFN Bypass Jurisdictional Conditions?|162
3|5.2.2 Should ‘Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius’ Be Used as a Primary Means for Applying MFN to Procedural Prerequisites?|179
3|5.2.3 Is It Necessary or Relevant to Compare Domestic Litigation Requirement with the Exhaustion of Local Remedies Rule?|187
3|5.2.4 Individual Perception of Few Arbitrators Should Not Influence the Interpretation|197
3|5.2.5 Is Consistency Desired in Applying MFN to Procedural Prerequisites?|200
2|5.3 Implications of Applying MFN for the Developing Countries|205
2|5.4 Conclusion|207
2|References|207
1|6 Application of MFN to Extend the Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunals|209
2|6.1 Introduction|210
2|6.2 How Jurisdiction Is Conferred on Investor-State Arbitral Tribunals?|213
2|6.3 Principles Emerging from the Arbitral Decisions that Allowed or Rejected MFN to Extend Jurisdiction|215
3|6.3.1 Should MFN Bypass Consent to Arbitration?|215
3|6.3.2 Is Inconsistent Application of the Rules of Treaty Interpretation Resulting in Expansive Interpretation Warranted?|242
3|6.3.3 Is Correction of IIA Dispute Settlement Clauses by MFN Problematic?|260
3|6.3.4 What Is the Implication of Majority of Arbitral Tribunals Rejecting Application of MFN to Jurisdictional Issues?|264
3|6.3.5 Is the Division Between Substantive and Procedural Standards in IIAs Relevant?|266
2|6.4 Application of MFN to Jurisdictional Issues: Implications for the Developing Countries|268
2|6.5 Conclusion|269
2|References|270
1|7 Conclusion|273
2|7.1 Major MFN Reforms by the Developing Countries in Their New Generation IIAs|273
2|7.2 Softer Commitment|274
2|7.3 Including MFN in the Substantive Parts of IIAs Only|275
2|7.4 Explicitly Excluding Dispute Settlement and Other Unintended Matters|276
3|7.4.1 Excluding Dispute Settlement in Footnotes|277
3|7.4.2 Excluding Dispute Settlement and Some Other Unintended Substantive Matters in Treaty Terms|278
2|7.5 Complete Omission of MFN from IIAs|281
2|7.6 A Shift from Explicit Extension of MFN Over a Range of IIA Provisions Covering Dispute Settlement|283
2|7.7 Overall Refined Drafting of MFN Clauses in New Generation IIAs|284
2|References|285
1|Table of Cases|287
1|Bibliography|295