Abstract
Abstract The engagement of domestic courts with international investment law (IIL) differs from that with other fields of international law. Domestic court decisions pertaining to IIL relate to a specific aspect of engagement with international law: they do not just deal with IIL; they deal with decisions of investment tribunals. The chapter focuses on domestic court decisions reviewing investment awards, arguing that they illustrate two paradoxes regarding the engagement of domestic courts with IIL. It considers the specific characteristics and tensions of IIL vis-à-vis domestic courts’ engagement with it, against the ‘ideal types’ of engagement developed by the International Law Association Study Group, namely avoidance, alignment, and contestation. The two main avenues for engagement are enforcement and challenge of arbitral awards before domestic courts. The chapter shows that acceptance of an award does not necessarily entail alignment with international norms, while its annulment does not necessarily mean contestation of international law.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
