Jump to Content
Jump to Main Navigation
User Account
Personal Profile
See all online law products
More
About
Guided Tour
Subscriber Services
FAQs
Help
Contact Us
Search
Advanced Search
Browse all
Content type
Case reports
Arbitral cases
Commentary and analysis
Book content
Journal articles
Yearbook articles
Investment treaty overviews (by jurisdiction)
Treaties
Multilateral treaties
Bilateral investment treaties
Other instruments and materials
Arbitral rules
Author
Arbitrators and Counsel
My Content
(0)
Recently viewed
(0)
Save Entry
My Searches
(0)
Recently viewed
(0)
Save Search
Print
Save
Cite
Email this content
Share Link
Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friend
Email this content
or copy the link directly:
https://oxia.ouplaw.com/abstract/10.1093/law:iic/journal046.document.1/law-iic-journal046
The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.
Link copied successfully
Copy link
Share This
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Signed in as:
Access is brought to you by
Sign in to an additional subscriber account
This account has no valid subscription for this site.
Get help with access
You could not be signed in, please check and try again.
Username
Please enter your Username
Password
Please enter your Password
Forgot password?
Don't have an account?
Sign in via your Institution
You could not be signed in, please check and try again.
Sign in with your library card
Please enter your library card number
View translated passages only
Oxford Law Citator
Contents
Expand All
Collapse All
I The Rise and Fall of the 1994 U.S. Model BIT
II The Drafting of the 2004 Model BIT
A Controlling investor-state arbitral tribunals
1 Clarifying the meaning of BIT provisions
A Minimum Standard of Treatment
B Expropriation
C The Definition of “Investment”
D The Definition of “Investor”
2 Participation by the BIT parties
B Preserving host country regulatory discretion
1 Creating general exceptions
A Regulating Financial Services
B Maintaining Confidentiality of Information
2 Allowing nonconforming measures
3 Limiting remedies
C Strengthening the norms of the international investment regime
1 Transparency
Transparency in Host Country Regulatory Conduct
B Transparency in Dispute Resolution
2 Performance requirements
3 Environment
4 Labor
D Promoting just and efficient dispute resolution
1 Expedited tribunal formation
2 Expedited review of objections
3 Appellate mechanism
4 Consolidation
5 Participation by experts
E Diverting cases from investor-state arbitration
1 Encouraging local remedies
2 Encouraging negotiated settlements
3 Imposing a three-year limitations period
III Conclusion
Sign up for alerts
A Comparison of the 2004 and 1994 US Model BITs
Kenneth Vandevelde
Content type:
Yearbook articles
Citation(s):
(2009) YIILP 2008-2009 283 (Other Reference)
OUP reference:
IC-JA 046 (2009)
Product:
Investment Claims [IC]
[18.97.9.175]
18.97.9.175