Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPETERSMANN, Ernst-Ulrich
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-05T15:56:34Z
dc.date.available2018-02-05T15:56:34Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1725-6739
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1814/51225
dc.description.abstractThis contribution discusses legal methodology problems of multilevel trade and investment regulation (section I) and explores related problems of adjudication involving investment projects in the context of China’s 2013 ‘One Belt, One Road’ (OBOR) initiative involving more than 65 countries (section II). The very limited number of investor-state arbitration proceedings initiated so far by foreign companies against China - or by Chinese companies against foreign host states – suggests that alternative dispute resolution may become one of the important ‘legal innovations’ of China’s OBOR cooperation. Yet, also involvement of third parties as ‘mediators’ or ‘conciliators’ in dispute settlement proceedings raises questions of ‘justice’ and of legal methodology that are easier to resolve by embedding OBOR regulations into multilateral trade, investment and UN law.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUI LAWen
dc.relation.ispartofseries2018/02en
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectAdjudicationen
dc.subjectAlternative dispute resolutionen
dc.subjectConstitutionalismen
dc.subjectLegal methodologyen
dc.subjectPrinciples of justiceen
dc.titleTrade and investment adjudication involving 'silk road projects' : legal methodology challengesen
dc.typeWorking Paperen


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record