Debates contemporáneos de derecho internacional económico. Enrique Prieto-Rios
Stephan W. (ed.), International investment law and comparative public law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010.
Schill, Stephan et. ál., General Public International Law and International Investment Law: A Research Sketch on Selected Issues, Berlín, Institute of Economic Law, 2009.
Schreuer, Christoph, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (2a ed.), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Schreuer, Christoph, “Calvo’s Grandchildren: The Return of Local Remedies in Investment Arbitration”, en The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, vol. 4, n° 1 (2005), pp. 1-17.
Sempra Energy International c. República Argentina, Caso ICSID nº ARB/02/16.
Sloane, Robert D., “On the use and abuse of necessity in the law of state responsibility”, en American Journal of International Law, vol. 106, n° 3 (2012), pp. 447-508.
Técnicas Medioambientales Tecmed S. A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case nº ARB(AF)/00/2, Award of 29 May 2003.
Total S.A. c. The Argentine Republic, CIADI nº ARB/04/01, 2010.
Verhoosel, Gaëtan, “Annulment and enforcement review of treaty awards: to ICSID or not to ICSID”, en ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, vol. 23, n° 1 (2008), pp. 119-154.
Wena Hotels Limited c. Egypt, CIADI 2002 (ICSID Case nº ARB/98/4), Decision on Application for Annulment, Feb. 5, 2002.
Notas
* Profesor de carrera de Derecho Internacional Público de la Facultad de Jurisprudencia de la Universidad del Rosario, máster en Derecho Internacional y asistente de investigación de la Stetson University College of Law, especialista en Derecho Constitucional, abogado y politólogo de la Universidad del Rosa-rio, candidato a doctor en Derecho de la Universidad del Rosario. Becario externo y diploma en Espacios marítimos, cursos de agua y Derecho Internacional de la Academia de Derecho Internacional de La Haya. Tutor de la Academia de Derecho Internacional de La Haya (2019). Investigador asociado reconocido por Colciencias (Convocatoria 781 de 2017). Fellow del Programa de difusión y perfeccionamiento del derecho internacional de la Oficina de Asuntos Legales de Naciones Unidas, investigador visitante de la Universidad de La Haya para las Ciencias Aplicadas, la Universidad Ártica de Noruega (JCLOS) y la Universidad de Copenhague (iCourts). Miembro del Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional. Miembro del Consejo Académico de la Revista Iberoamericana de Derecho Internacional y de la Integración (UBA, Argentina). Miembro del Consejo Académico de la Revista de Direito Internacional e Direitos Humanos, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ, Brasil). Miembro del Consejo Directivo de la Academia Colombiana de Derecho Internacional. Profesor del Curso de Formación Diplomática de la Academia Diplomática Augusto Ramírez Ocampo, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de la República de Colombia. Director de la Red Latinoamericana de Revistas de Derecho Internacional. Miembro de la American Bar Association, la International Law Association y la International Bar Association. Miembro de la Sociedad Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional.
1 Gaëtan Verhoosel, “Annulment and enforcement review of treaty awards: to ICSID or not to ICSID”, en ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, vol. 23, n° 1 (2008), pp. 119-154.
2 Jo Delaney, “‘Expropriation’ and ‘Fair and Equitable Treatment’ Standards in Recent ICSID Jurisprudence”, en Rainer Hofmann y Christian Tams (eds.), The International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), Nomos, Baden-Baden, 2007, pp. 73-80.
3 Stephan W. Schill (ed.), International investment law and comparative public law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010.
4 Campbell McLachlan, “Investment treaties and general international law”, en International & Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 57, n° 2 (2008), pp. 361-401.
5 José E. Alvarez, The public international law regime governing international investment, Leiden, the Netherlands, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2011.
6 Susan D. Franck, “The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions”, en Fordham Law Review, vol. 73, n° 4 (2005), p. 1521.
7 James D. Fry, “International Human Rights Law in Investment Arbitration: Evidence of International Law’s Unity”, en Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, vol 18, n° 1 (2007), p. 77.
8 Tarcisio Gazzini y Eric De Brabandere (eds.), International Investment Law. The Sources of Rights and Obligations, Leiden, the Netherlands, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2012.
9 Christoph Schreuer, “Calvo’s Grandchildren: The Return of Local Remedies in Investment Arbitration”, en The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, vol. 4, n° 1 (2005), pp. 1-17.
10 CMS Gas Transmission Co. c. Argentina, CIADI nº ARB/01/8, Decision on Annulment, para. 66-68.
11 Walter Arévalo, Manual de derecho internacional público, Valencia, Tirant Lo Blanch, 2019.
12 Walter Arévalo y Laura García, “Arbitraje de inversión. Definición y aspectos procesales relevantes: principios generales y desarrollos en el CIADI”, en Laura García y Antonio Aljure (eds.), Estudios contemporáneos de derecho internacional privado, Bogotá, Legis Editores, 2016, pp. 243-278.
13 Andreas F. Lowenfeld, “Investment agreements and international law”, en Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 42, n° 1 (2003), p. 123.
14 Emmanuel Gaillard y Yas Banifatemi, “The Meaning of ‘and’ in Article 42(1), Second Sentence, of the Washington Convention: The Role of International Law in the ICSID Choice of Law Process”, en ICSID Review, vol. 18, nº 2 (2003), pp. 375-411.
15 Arévalo y García, ob. cit.
16 Christoph Schreuer, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (2a ed.), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 607.
17 Arévalo, Manual de derecho internacional público.
18 Okezie Chukwumerije, “International law and Article 42 of the ICSID Convention”, en Journal of International Arbitration, vol. 14, n° 3 (1997), pp. 79-101.
19 Arévalo y García, ob. cit.
20 Schreuer, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary, pp. 608-609.
21 Gaillard y Banifatemi, ob. cit.
22 Ibíd., p. 373.
23 Ibíd., pp. 371-374.
24 Klockner c. Cameroon, Ad Hoc Committee Decision, 1985 2 ICSID Rep. 95, 1994, para. 122: “Article 42 of the Washington Convention certainly provides that ‘in the absence of agreement between the parties, the Tribunal shall apply the law of the Contracting State party to the dispute […] and such principles of international law as may be applicable.’ This gives these principles (perhaps omitting cases in which it should be ascertained whether the domestic law conforms to international law) a dual role, that is, complementary (in the case of a ‘lacuna’ in the law of the State), or corrective, should the State’s law not conform on all points to the principles of international law. In both cases, the arbitrators may have recourse to the ‘principles of international law’ only after having inquired into and established the content of the law of the State party to the dispute (which cannot be reduced to one principle, even a basic one) and after having applied the relevant rule of the State’s law. Article 42(1) therefore clearly does not allow the arbitrator to base his decision solely on the ‘rules’ or ‘principles of international law’ ”.
25 Gaillard y Banifatemi, ob. cit., p. 399.
26 Wena Hotels Limited c. Egypt, CIADI 2002 (ICSID Case nº ARB/98/4), Decision on Application for Annulment, Feb. 5, 2002, para. 38-40.
27 Annie Leeks, “The relationship between bilateral investment