Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:57:33.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Interpretation of International Investment Law: Equality, Discrimination and Minimum Standards of Treatment in Historical Context. By Todd Weiler. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2013. 526 pages.

Review products

The Interpretation of International Investment Law: Equality, Discrimination and Minimum Standards of Treatment in Historical Context. By Todd Weiler. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2013. 526 pages.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2016

J. Anthony VanDuzer
J. Anthony VanDuzer*
Affiliation:
Common Law Section, University of Ottawa
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews / Recensions de livres
Information
Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international , Volume 51 , 2014 , pp. 631 - 638
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Council on International Law / Conseil Canadien de Droit International, representing the Board of Editors, Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Comité de Rédaction, Annuaire Canadien de Droit International 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Some other commentators note that this standard is traditionally limited to the protection of property, though some arbitral awards have adopted a broader interpretation. See Newcombe, Andrew and Paradell, Lluis Law and Practice of International Investment Law: Standards of Protection (Deventer: Wolters Kluwer, 2009) at 308, 310–13.Google Scholar

2 Newcombe and Paradell conclude that investment arbitration awards support the view that fair and equitable treatment (FET) remains a separate treaty-based standard (ibid at 269). See the similar conclusion reached in Dumberry, Patrick The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard: A Guide to NAFTA Case Law on Article 1105 (Deventer: Wolters Kluwer, 2013) at 307.Google Scholar

3 See, for example, ibid at 137–70, 315–16.

4 DiMascio, Nicholas and Pauwelyn, Joost, “Nondiscrimination in Trade and Investment Treaties: Worlds Apart of Two Sides of the Same Coin” (2008) 102 AJIL 48 at 60.Google Scholar

5 Ibid at 62–66.