Policies aimed at the expansion of transnational capital are sometimes implemented at the expense of growing social inequality and popular frustration in host countries. This timely and deeply researched volume identifies – and offers new insights into – the growing use of and reliance upon international environmental and human rights law in the arbitration of investor–State disputes. It presents a comprehensive and pragmatic approach to the most effective way to connect international investment law to the protection of human rights and the environment. Based on an analysis of 30 arbitral awards, this book demonstrates how recent investment treaty arbitration – and in particular respondent States’ argumentation in arbitral proceedings – highlights the human rights and environmental considerations connected with such factors as the following: the fair and equitable treatment (FET) clause; jurisdictional obstacles; treaty conflict; role of amici curiae; damages; tribunal’s dilution of the significance of environmental and human rights law; corporate social responsibility; free, prior, and informed consent; social license to operate; and (in)applicability of the systemic approach to the interpretation of investment treaties. As investment arbitration continues to be challenged by growing demands for greater public involvement and for participation of third parties that are affected by the proceedings, this book responds to the need to reshape the investment regime into more human rights and environmentally friendly system. It will prove an invaluable resource for arbitral institutions, academics, arbitrators, arbitration counsel, and other participants in investment treaty arbitration.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.