International Investment Law Journal
Volume 5, Issue 2, July 2025
Table of Contents
-
- Associate professor Cristina Elena POPA TACHE; Associate professor Paolo VARGIU
Editorial: Coherence and Doctrinal Dispersal in Investment Law: Same Parties, Same Claims, a Parallel Universe?Abstract:This editorial addresses the doctrinal and structural tensions affecting international investment arbitration, with a focus on the notion of res judicata and the fundamental question of whether this area of law constitutes a ‘system’ or merely mimics the characteristics of one. Drawing on the controversial case of Frenkel v. Croatia, in which the tribunal invoked res judicata in a context marked by the ambiguity of the legal identity of the claimants, the editorial reflects on the precariousness of the concepts of finality, identity and justice in the absence of a hierarchy of legal authority. On this basis, the contributions contained in the current issue of the International Investment Law Journal are analysed, which convergently shed light on the dilemmas of systemic regime coherence: estoppel and legitimate expectations (Zia Akhtar), climate policy protection and legal solidarity (Federica Cristani), comparative national regimes in Romania and Slovakia (Tiberiu Paveleșcu; Tomáš Peráček & Michal Kaššaj) and the contested example given by Tanzania (Julius Clement Mashamba). Each contribution highlights a dimension of what we mean by systemic fragmentation, but also the potential for crystallising common principles. The editorial argues that only critical and comparative reflection can transform the aspiration of a system into a normative reality.
Keywords:international investments, investor protection, UNCITRAL, res judicata, legal identity, investment arbitration, estoppel, legitimate expectations.
JEL Classification:F21, K33, K41, O10
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/01
Please cite this article as: Popa Tache, Cristina Elena & Paolo Vargiu, ‘Editorial. Coherence and Doctrinal Dispersal in Investment Law: Same Parties, Same Claims, a Parallel Universe?’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 118-124.
Page 118 - Ph.D. candidate Zia AKHTAR
Proprietary Estoppel and Legitimate Expectations, Res Judicata in Interstate ArbitrationAbstract:The concept of estoppel has been enshrined in international arbitration law and this is development arises from the pacta sunt servanda, abuse of rights, estoppel and acquiescence, which require disputes to be settled in good faith. The promissory estoppel is the ground which has been recognised in international arbitration and applies in intestate disputes where the Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITS) are in breach. The source of law that regulates disputes in arbitration tribunals is derived from European administrative law and relates to the principle of public bodies acting with probity and diligence in executing their functions. The doctrine of legitimate expectations emanates from public law in EU states, such as vertrauensschutz in German administrative law, which can be compared to legitimate expectations in BITs. The principles have been applied in the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunals to provide protection for investors. In putting effect arbitral rulings, the courts have to consider if they are res judicata or merely collateral estoppel in their effect. This paper enquires the extent to which the courts will consider the arbitral rulings for their finality based on legitimate expectations and not overrule them in consideration of the doctrine of estoppel in international law.
Keywords: proprietary estoppel, legitimate expectations, BITS, state investor protection, fair and equitable treatment (FET), Energy Charter Treaty, vertrauensschutz, principe de sécurité des situations juridiques, collateral estoppel, res judicata.
JEL Classification: K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/02
Please cite this article as:
Akhtar, Zia, ‘Proprietary Estoppel and Legitimate Expectations, Res Judicata in Interstate Arbitration’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 125-155.
Page 125 - Senior Researcher Ph.D. Federica CRISTANI
Safeguarding Climate Policy in Third-Party Funded Investment Arbitration Through Legal Solidarity Mechanisms: The Potential Role of the Forthcoming UNCITRAL’s Advisory CentreAbstract:This article explores how the forthcoming UNCITRAL Advisory Centre on International Investment Dispute Resolution (ACIIR) can assist states, particularly developing countries, in defending climate policies against investor claims backed by third-party funding (TPF) in investment arbitration. As climate-related regulatory measures increasingly trigger Investor- State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims – increasingly financed by non-party funders – the risk of a ‘regulatory chill’ grows, disproportionately affecting climate-vulnerable states. The article examines how TPF alters the dynamics of ISDS and creates systemic imbalances in arbitration proceedings that can ultimately jeopardise national climate policies. The article argues that the ACIIR, envisioned as a multilateral support hub, could function as a mechanism of legal solidarity by offering technical assistance, procedural guidance, legal representation, and training tailored to climate-focused disputes. It also offers practical recommendations – such as equipping the Centre with environmental law expertise and fostering peer networks among similarly situated states – to enhance the Centre’s climate-defensive potential. Ultimately, the article proposes that, with adequate resources and mandates, the ACIIR can help support investor-state arbitration toward safeguarding public interests, including climate change ones.
Keywords: Investor-State Dispute Settlement; Climate Policies; Third-Party Funding; UNCITRAL; Advisory Centre on International Investment Dispute Resolution.
JEL Classification: K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/03
Please cite this article as:
Cristani, Federica, ‘Safeguarding Climate Policy in Third Party Funded Investment Arbitration Through Legal Solidarity Mechanisms: The Potential Role of the Forthcoming UNCITRAL’s Advisory Centre’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 156-170.
Page 156 - Associate professor Tiberiu PAVELESCU
The Legal Regime of Foreign Investment in the Romanian Technology Sector: A Comparative StudyAbstract:Foreign direct investment (FDI) in the technology sector is a strategic component of sustainable economic development in Central and Eastern Europe, particularly in Romania, a country at the intersection of booming digital potential and the requirements of European regulation. The study analyses the legal regime applicable to foreign investment in technology in Romania, drawing on primary and secondary legislation and investment treaties, as well as screening and authorisation mechanisms recently put in place against the backdrop of the European Union’s economic security regulations (Regulation – EU – 2019/452). The paper uses a comparative method by examining similar regimes in Germany, Hungary and Bulgaria, highlighting convergences as well as national particularities. In addition to the normative analysis, the study also explores relevant case law and recent doctrinal opinions in order to assess the concrete impact of the legal regime on attracting investment and protecting the public interest. The conclusions aim to formulate public policy recommendations by balancing the need for economic openness with the imperatives of technological sovereignty and national security.
Keywords: foreign direct investment, technology sector, Romania, economic security, legal regime.
JEL Classification: K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/04
Please cite this article as:
Pavelescu, Tiberiu, ‘The Legal Regime of Foreign Investment in the Romanian Technology Sector: A Comparative Study’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 171-184.
Page 171 -
Professor Tomáš PERÁČEK; PhD. student Michal KAŠŠAJ
The Impact on Investors of Legislative Restrictions on the Activities of Securities Traders: The Case of the Slovak RepublicAbstract:Investing from a financial point of view is an activity focused on the placement and distribution of the investor's free funds with the aim of their future appreciation, or obtaining income resulting from the subsequent difference in the price of the security. When trading this commodity, it is necessary in the Slovak Republic to use several contract types contained in the Securities and Investment Services Act. The most important contract type is the contract on the portfolio of securities, which is used by securities traders. This contract or, however, the activities included in this contract consist of four contracts regulating the procurement of the purchase or sale of a security, its custody and management. For this reason, we devote our attention and main goal to an in-depth examination of selected contracts as well as activities that together form a contract on the management of a portfolio of securities. We use selected scientific research methods such as critical analysis, synthesis, deduction and comparison as well as scientific and doctrinal interpretation. The material of our scientific study consists of the Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on securities trading, the Securities Act, the Commercial Code, the Civil Code, professional literature as well as judgments of Slovak and Czech courts. The results indicate that the development of the securities portfolio management contract is stuck in time, as the legislation, among other shortcomings, does not allow an electronic conclusion of this contract.
Keywords: Commercial Code, contract, portfolio management, securities, traders, investor.
JEL Classification: K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/05
Please cite this article as:
Peráček, Tomáš & Michal Kaššaj, ‘The Impact on Investors of Legislative Restrictions on the Activities of Securities Traders: The Case of the Slovak Republic’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 185-205.
Page 185 - Senior lecturer Julius Clement MASHAMBA
Critical Examination of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Its Application and Implications in TanzaniaAbstract:The proliferation of international investment treaties (IIAs) has introduced a specific mechanism for resolving investment disputes globally. Most IIAs in force today have embraced investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), through which many host States are sued in international arbitral institutions. One of the critical aspects of the operationalisation of the ISDS system is that many host states, like Tanzania, have been slapped with excessive arbitral awards that have, in some cases, threatened such countries’ sovereign debts, resulting in both ‘regulatory chill’ and ‘compensation chill’. To create a balance between investor protections and obligations at the domestic level, Tanzania should create a conducive domestic environment to manage IIAs. Such positive and effective management of IIAs can be realised by Tanzania adopting effective policy, legislative, administrative and institutional reform measures, including adopting positive policy options on IIAs; harmonising and strengthening legal frameworks with IIAs; creating effective coordination, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for IIAs.
Keywords: foreign direct investment (FDI); international investment treaties (IIAs); investor protection vis-à-vis investor obligations; investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS); Tanzanian national investment legislation; reform measures to create a balance between investor protections and obligations.
JEL Classification: K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2025/5/2/06
Please cite this article as:
Mashamba, Julius Clement, ‘Critical Examination of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Its Application and Implications in Tanzania’, International Investment Law Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2025): 206-238.
Page 206
