The Protection Offered by “Umbrella Clauses” in Korean Investment Treaties
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Korea is, after China, the Asian country with the largest number of concluded investment treaties. One of the protections that Korean investment treaties frequently afford to foreign investors and their investment is the so?called “umbrella clause,” which requires the host state of the investment to observe the commitments that it has undertaken toward the foreign investor or its investment. This is a potentially very powerful protection. Umbrella clauses, however, have proven to be amongst the most controversial provisions in investment treaties, giving rise to diverging interpretations by tribunals and commentators that are still not reconciled today.
Abstract
Korea is, after China, the Asian country with the largest number of concluded investment treaties. One of the protections that Korean investment treaties frequently afford to foreign investors and their investment is the so?called “umbrella clause,” which requires the host state of the investment to observe the commitments that it has undertaken toward the foreign investor or its investment. This is a potentially very powerful protection. Umbrella clauses, however, have proven to be amongst the most controversial provisions in investment treaties, giving rise to diverging interpretations by tribunals and commentators that are still not reconciled today.
참고문헌 (44)
- Alexandrov, Stanimir A, "Breaches of Contracts and Breaches of Treaty – The Jurisdiction of Treaty‐Based Arbitration Tribunals to Decide Breach of Contract Claims in SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines", Journal of World Investment & Trade, 5(4), pp.555~ (2004)
- Cohen Smutny, Abby, "Chapter 15 The MFN Clause: What Are Its Limits In Small, Arbitration Under International Investment Agreements – A Guide to the Key Issues" (2010), Oxford University Press
- Dolzer, Rudolf, "Principles of International Investment Law", pp.166~ (2012), Oxford University Press
- Gaillard, Emmanuel, "A Black Year for ICSID", New York Law Journal (2007)
- Gaillard, Emmanuel, "Investment Treaty Arbitration and Jurisdiction over Contractual Claims – The SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines precedents In International Investment Law and Arbitration – Leading Cases from the ICSID, NAFTA, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Customary International Law" (2005), Cameron May
- Gaillard, Emmanuel, "La Jurisprudence du CIRDI", Pedone, 759~835 (2004)
- Gallus, Nick, "An Umbrella Just for Two? BIT Obligations Observance Clauses and the Parties to a Contract", Arbitration International, 24(1), pp.157~ (2008)
- "Lone Star Claims Against South Korea Has An Arbitral Tribunal in Place"[URL]
- The Interpretation of the Umbrella Clause in Investment Agreements, "OECD", ~, pp.Working Papers on International Investment, No 2006 (2006), 3
- Schreuer, Christoph H, "Travelling the BIT Route – Of Waiting Periods, Umbrella Clauses and Forks in the Road", Journal of World Investment & Trade, 5(2), pp.231~ (2004)
- Weiler, T.G, "Part I – Umbrella Clause", Investment Treaty Arbitration and International Law (2008), JurisNet
- Azurix, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 01, pp.2006, ~
- Bosh International, Inc., "ICSID Case No. ARB", 08, pp.2012, ~
- "Bureau Veritas, Inspection, Valuation, Assessment and Control, BIVAC B.V. v. The Republic of Paraguay, ICSID Case No. ARB", 07, pp.2009, ~
- Burlington Resources Inc, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 08, pp.2010, ~
- Burlington Resources Inc, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 08, pp.2012, ~
- CMS Gas Transmission Company, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 01, pp.2005, ~
- CMS Gas Transmission Company, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 01, pp.2007, ~
- Compañiá de Aguas del Aconquija S.A., "ICSID Case No. ARB", 97, pp.2002, ~
- Consortium Groupement L.E.S.I.‐ DIPENTA, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2005, ~
- Continental Casualty Company, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2008, ~
- Duke Energy Electroquil Partners, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 04, pp.2008, ~
- EDF International S.A, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2012, ~
- El Paso Energy International Company, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2006, ~
- Enron Corporation, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 01, pp.2007, ~
- Eureko BV, "Partial Award dated August 19", ~ (2005)
- Gustav F W Hamester GmbH & Co KG, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 07, pp.2010, ~
- Impregilo S.p.A, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2005, ~
- Joy Mining Machinery Limited, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, pp.2004, ~
- LG&E Energy Corp, "ICSID ARB", 02, Award dated July 25, pp.2007, ~
- Liman Caspian Oil BV, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 07, pp.2010, ~
- Limited Liability Company Amto, "SCC Case No. 080", 2005, Final Award dated March 26, 2008
- Mohammad Ammar‐ Al‐Bahloul, "SCC Case No. V(064", 2008), Partial Award on Jurisdiction and Liability dated June 18, 2010
- Noble Ventures, Inc, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 01, pp.2005, ~
- Pan American Energy LLC, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 03, 04, pp.8, Decision on Preliminary Objections dated July 27[DOI]
- Sempra Energy International, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 02, pp.2007, ~
- SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A, "ICSID Case No. ARB", 07, pp.2010, ~
- SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A., "ICSID Case No. ARB", 07, pp.2012, ~
- SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A., "ICSID Case No. ARB", 02, pp.2004, ~
- Siemens A.G., "ICSID Case No. ARB", 02, pp.2007, ~
- White Industries Australia Limited, "UNCITRAL, Award dated November 30", ~ (2011)