Reasoning with Previous Awards in International Investment Arbitration : Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2021/II/3
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F21%3A10432028" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/21:10432028 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=oqZUt9.NZ2" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=oqZUt9.NZ2</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
—
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Reasoning with Previous Awards in International Investment Arbitration : Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2021/II/3
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
The non-existence of the stare decisis doctrine in international investment law creates a potential for development of contrasting awards articulating opposing results for fundamentally same issues. Despite the non-existence of the stare decisis doctrine, tribunals do frequently rely on previous awards in order to maintain predictability of the international investment law. Arbitrators in international disputes, however, come from different legal cultures. This cultural background possibly influences how they approach previously rendered awards and how they reason with them. In 2013, Professor Jan Komárek published a study where he distinguished two types of reasoning with previous decisions: case-bound technique and legislative technique. Professor Komárek linked the two techniques to common law and civil law culture respectively. This article applies those two general techniques to several international investment awards. By doing so, the article demonstrates that arbitrators in international treaty arbitration use both techniques when reasoning with the same awards and reaching decisions on similar matters. The article then considers whether one of the techniques is better suited than the other in leading towards a consistent case law in the environment of investment treaty arbitration.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Reasoning with Previous Awards in International Investment Arbitration : Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2021/II/3
Popis výsledku anglicky
The non-existence of the stare decisis doctrine in international investment law creates a potential for development of contrasting awards articulating opposing results for fundamentally same issues. Despite the non-existence of the stare decisis doctrine, tribunals do frequently rely on previous awards in order to maintain predictability of the international investment law. Arbitrators in international disputes, however, come from different legal cultures. This cultural background possibly influences how they approach previously rendered awards and how they reason with them. In 2013, Professor Jan Komárek published a study where he distinguished two types of reasoning with previous decisions: case-bound technique and legislative technique. Professor Komárek linked the two techniques to common law and civil law culture respectively. This article applies those two general techniques to several international investment awards. By doing so, the article demonstrates that arbitrators in international treaty arbitration use both techniques when reasoning with the same awards and reaching decisions on similar matters. The article then considers whether one of the techniques is better suited than the other in leading towards a consistent case law in the environment of investment treaty arbitration.
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>ost</sub> - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
50501 - Law
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2021
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Prague Law Working Paper Series [online]
ISSN
2336-5811
e-ISSN
—
Svazek periodika
2021
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
II
Stát vydavatele periodika
CZ - Česká republika
Počet stran výsledku
14
Strana od-do
3
Kód UT WoS článku
—
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
—