Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Review of National Competition Authorities’ Acts in Investment Arbitration: Setting Limits to ‘Economic Lawfare’ in the 21st Century

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Investment Law and Competition Law

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((Spec. Issue))

  • 732 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores what could be an appropriate standard of review that investment arbitrators could use to evaluate the lawfulness of acts of national competition authorities in the context of “economic lawfare”. The interest in international investment arbitration and competition law adjudicators is justified since both are empowered with effective coercion mechanisms. Also, both fields have developed a highly specialized legal vocabulary to codify economic transactions. Therefore, in the context of current developments especially with the intervention of state-owned enterprises in the markets of other states, it is possible that these two fields could be used (or abused) by the states involved in an international conflict. These dynamics are explored with reference to the arbitration case between Gazprom, the state-owned enterprise of Russia and the Ukrainian competition authority. The chapter argues in general for the need of a three-principles standard of review to examine the acts of national competition authorities in light of the current standards of treatment contained in international investment agreements (IIAs).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Førland (1993), p. 151.

  2. 2.

    In this context sanctions mean “economic measures – in contrast to diplomatic or military ones – taken by states to express disapproval of the acts of the target state or to induce that the state has to change some policy or practice or even its governmental structure” Lowenfeld (2009), p. 850.

  3. 3.

    This term started to appear in the literature after the 9/11 attacks in the United States. For an account of the first use of the term see, OECD (2004a) The Financial War on Terrorism.

  4. 4.

    Gross and Meisels (2017), p. 195.

  5. 5.

    Gross and Meisels (2017).

  6. 6.

    Dunlap (2005), p. 95.

  7. 7.

    Dill (2017).

  8. 8.

    Koskenniemi (2009), p. 798.

  9. 9.

    European Comission (2016), p. 6.

  10. 10.

    European Comission (2016), p. 7.

  11. 11.

    Financial Times https://www.ft.com/content/b85f8f48-2768-11e8-b27e-cc62a39d57a0.

  12. 12.

    Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine [Антимонопольний Комітет України Рішення] (2016), p. 4, para. 35.

  13. 13.

    The WTO panel arrived to such conclusion based on the analysis of several of UN General Assembly resolutions in WT/DS512/R (2019), Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit report, para. 7.121–7.123.

  14. 14.

    Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (2016), resolution 2, p. 9.

  15. 15.

    Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (2016), p. 4, para. 32.

  16. 16.

    Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (2016), p. 7 and 8 para. 64.

  17. 17.

    Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (2016), resolution, p. 9.

  18. 18.

    BIT Russian Federation – Ukraine BIT signed in Moscow, November 27, 1998.

  19. 19.

    Russian Energy Firm Gazprom Reportedly Notifies Ukraine of Bit Claim, Investment Arbitration Reporter 2018. https://www.iareporter.com/articles/russian-energy-firm-gazprom-reportedly-notifies-ukraine-of-bit-claim/.

  20. 20.

    Article 2.2 of the Ukraine – Russia BIT (1998).

  21. 21.

    OECD (2004b), p. 4.

  22. 22.

    Concerning Elettronica Sicula S.P.A. (Elsi) United States of America v. Italy, International Court of Justice, 20 July 1989.

  23. 23.

    Occidental v. Ecuador (I), LCIA Case No. UN 3467, Award, 1 July 2004.

  24. 24.

    Crystallex v. Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/2, Award, 4 April 2016, para. 578.

  25. 25.

    Genin v. Estonia, ICSID Case No. ARB/99/2, Award 25 June 2001, para. 370.

  26. 26.

    Crystallex v. Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/2, Award, 4 April 2016, para. 578, paras 590–591.

  27. 27.

    Crystallex v. Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/2, Award, 4 April 2016, para. 578.

  28. 28.

    Arif v. Moldova, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/23, Award, 8 April 2013, para. 345.

  29. 29.

    Corona Materials v. Dominican Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/14/3 Award (2016), paras 264, 265.

  30. 30.

    Toto v. Lebanon, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/12, Decision on Jurisdiction, Award, 7 June 2009, para. 156.

  31. 31.

    Toto v. Lebanon, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/12, Award, 7 June 2009, para. 157.

  32. 32.

    Quote from the Fabiani case, in Toto v. Lebanon, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/12, Decision on Jurisdiction, 7 June 2009, para. 156.

  33. 33.

    Article 4 of the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001).

  34. 34.

    Nazzini (2011), p. 885.

  35. 35.

    Nazzini (2011), p. 886.

  36. 36.

    Martinez and Martinez (2015), p. 262.

  37. 37.

    Martinez and Martinez (2015).

  38. 38.

    Tecmed v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/00/2, Award, 29 May 2003.

  39. 39.

    Sweet (2010).

  40. 40.

    Occidental v. Ecuador (I), LCIA Case No. UN 3467, Award, 1 July 2004.

  41. 41.

    Pl Holdings v. Poland SCC Case No. 2014/163, Partial Award (2017), paras 356–373.

  42. 42.

    Pl Holdings v. Poland (2017), paras 374–383.

  43. 43.

    Pl Holdings v. Poland (2017), paras 384–410.

  44. 44.

    Telenor v. Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/15, Award (2006).

References

  • Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine [Антимонопольний Комітет України Рішення] (2016) Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine - Gazprom, About the Violation Legislation on Protection Economic Competition and Imposing a Penalization

    Google Scholar 

  • Dill J (2017) Abuse of law on the twenty-first-century battlefield: a typology of lawfare. In: Gross ML, Meisels T (eds) Soft war: the ethics of unarmed conflict. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap C (2005) Remarks at the Keystone Leadership Summit. The Reporter Keystone Edition

    Google Scholar 

  • European Comission (2016) State-owned enterprises in the EU: lessons learnt and ways forward in a post-crisis context. European Comission

    Google Scholar 

  • Førland TE (1993) The history of economic warfare: international law, effectiveness, strategies. J Peace Res 30(2):151–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross ML, Meisels T (2017) Soft war the ethics of unarmed conflict. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2009) Legal fragmentation(s): an essay on fluidity and form. In: Calliess C, Fischer-Lescano A, Wielsch D, Zumbansen P (eds) Soziologische Jurisprudenz: Festschrift Für Gunther Teubner, De Gruyter Recht, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenfeld A (2009) International economic law, 2nd edn. Repr. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez C, Martinez L (2015) Proportionality in investment treaty arbitration and beyond: an “irresistible attraction”? BCDR Int Arbitr Rev 2:261–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Nazzini R (2011) Parallel proceedings before the tribunal and the courts/competition authorities. In: Blanke G, Landolt P (eds) EU and US antitrust arbitration: a handbook for practitioners. Kluwer Law International

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2004a) The financial war on terrorism. OECD

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2004b) Working papers on international investment, 2004/04. “Indirect Expropriation” and the “Right to Regulate” in international investment law. OECD

    Google Scholar 

  • Russian Energy Firm Gazprom Reportedly Notifies Ukraine of Bit Claim, IA REPORTER2018

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweet AS (2010) Investor-state arbitration: proportionality’s new frontier. Law Ethics Human Rights 4(1):48–76

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università degli Studi di Torino, Turin, Italy

    José Gustavo Prieto Muñoz

Authors
  1. José Gustavo Prieto Muñoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Law School, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain

    Katia Fach Gómez

  2. Athens Public International Law Center, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Anastasios Gourgourinis

  3. French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS)-CERSA, University Paris II Panthéon-Assas, Paris, France

    Catharine Titi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Prieto Muñoz, J.G. (2020). The Review of National Competition Authorities’ Acts in Investment Arbitration: Setting Limits to ‘Economic Lawfare’ in the 21st Century. In: Fach Gómez, K., Gourgourinis, A., Titi, C. (eds) International Investment Law and Competition Law. European Yearbook of International Economic Law(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33916-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33916-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33915-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33916-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation