Advertisement

Awarding Damages in Times of Armed Conflict: An Emerging Standard of “Economic Capacity” for the Host State

  • Jose Gustavo Prieto Muñoz
Chapter
Part of the European Yearbook of International Economic Law book series (EUROYEAR)

Abstract

This chapter considers what legal standards should be applied by an arbitration tribunal in the assessment of damages in the context of armed conflicts. It is argued that if a dispute arises within the context of an armed conflict, an arbitration tribunal needs to apply a different methodological approach than in times of peace. Specifically, investment arbitrators could engage with the concrete legal standard for the “economic capacity” of the host State that emerges from decisions made by the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission. The adoption of this standard could provide valuable guidance when confronting the difficult task of calculating damages in the context of armed struggles. In order to advance this argument, the chapter provides a general map of the current methods and sources applied by investment tribunals to assess damages in the absence of definitive written provisions in the relevant international investment agreements. It further discusses the “economical capacity” standard developed in the final award of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission and the way that this conceptual development could be applied to investment arbitration in times of armed conflict.

References

  1. Aaken A (2010) Primary and secondary remedies in international investment law and national state liability: a functional and comparative view. In: Schill SW (ed) International investment law and comparative public law. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Boisson de Chazournes L, Campanelli D (2006) Mixed commissions. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Campanelli D (2006) Mixed commissions. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Castagnetti I (2013) The damages awards of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission war damages and reparations for violation of Jus Ad Bellum. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL]. OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins D (2011) Applying the full protection and security standard of international investment law to digital assets. J World Invest Trade 12(2):225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crawford J (2000) Special Rapporteur, “Document a/Cn.4/507 Third Report on State Responsibility”, 2000Google Scholar
  7. Crawford J (2002) The international law commission’s articles on state responsibility introduction, text and commentaries. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Crawford E (2015) Armed conflict, international. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. De Brabandere E (2015) Jus Post Bellum and Foreign direct investment: mapping the debate. J World Invest Trade 16(4):590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Guttry A, De Guttry A (2009) The 1998–2000 War between Eritrea and Ethiopia an International Legal Perspective. In: The Nineteen Ninety-Eight—2000 War between Eritrea and Ethiopia. T.M.C. Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  11. Dolzer R (2011) Mixed claims commissions. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford Public International Law, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Francioni F (2013) Equity in international law. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International LawGoogle Scholar
  13. Franck TM (1997) Fairness in international law and institutions. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Klein N (2013) Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL]. OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Koskenniemi M (2009) Legal fragmentation(s) an essay on fluidity and form in Soziologische Jurisprudenz: Festschrift Fur Gunther Teubner. De Gruyter Recht, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Kritchevsky B (2016) If there’s a right, is there a remedy? The Federal Courts’ role in remedying constitutional violations. In: Areshidze G et al (eds) Constitutionalism, executive power, and the spirit of moderation. SUNY Series in American Constitutionalism, SUNY Press, pp 97–101Google Scholar
  17. Marboe I (2017) Calculation of compensation and damages in international investment law, Oxford International Arbitration Series. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Matheson MJ (2013) The damage awards of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL]. OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Mensah TA (2011) United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC). In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Murphy SD, Kidane W, Snider TR (2013) Litigating war: arbitration of civil injury by the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Ntoubandi ZF, Marauhn T (2016) Armed conflict, non-international. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Ostřanský J (2015) The termination and suspension of bilateral investment treaties due to an armed conflict. J Int Dispute Settlement 6(1):136–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ripinsky S, Williams K (2008) Damages in international investment law. British Institute of International and Comparative Law, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Schreuer C (1996) Decisions ex Aequo et Bono under the ICSID Convention. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 11:37–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schreuer C (2010) Full protection and security. J Int Dispute Settlement 1(2):353–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schreuer C (2012) The protection of investments in armed conflict. Transnatl Dispute Manage 3Google Scholar
  27. Simmons JB (2012) Valuation in investor-state arbitration: toward a more exact science. Berkeley J Int Law 30(1):196Google Scholar
  28. Szpak A (2013) The Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission and Customary International Humanitarian Law. In: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL]. OxfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Trenor JA (2016) The guide to damages in international arbitration Great Britain. Law Business Research Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. UNCTAD (2017) Phase 2 of IIA reform: modernizing the existing stock of old-generation treatiesGoogle Scholar
  31. Vattel E (1811) The law of nations or principles of the law of nature applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns, Le Droit Des Gens ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle. Clarke, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Wälde TW, Sabahi B (2008) Compensation, damages, and valuation. In: Muchlinski P, Ortino F, Schreuer C (eds) The Oxford handbook of international investment law 2008. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  33. Weiler T (2013) The interpretation of international investment law. Interactive Factory, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Whiteman MM (1937) Damages in international law. Government Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. Wöss H et al (2014) Damages in international arbitration under complex long-term contracts, Oxford International Arbitration Series. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. Yannaca-Small K (2008) Parallel proceedings. In: Muchlinski FOP, Schreuer C (eds) The Oxford handbook of international investment. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jose Gustavo Prieto Muñoz
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Turin, Department of LawTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations