Call for Papers: Society of International Economic Law Tenth Biennial Conference

A call for papers has been issued for the Society of International Economic Law's tenth biennial conference, which will take place July 7-9, 2027, in Christchurch, hosted by the University of Canterbury. The theme is: "Reimagining International Economic Law: Reasons, Challenges, and Future Directions." The call is here.

Schneiderman: A Sociology of International Investment Law: Themes from Max Weber

David Schneiderman (Univ. of Toronto - Law) has published A Sociology of International Investment Law: Themes from Max Weber (Oxford Univ. Press 2026). This is an open access title. Here's the abstract:

A Sociology of International Investment Law applies methods associated with the sociologist Max Weber to illuminate aspects of international investment law - a regime made up of thousands of treaties that protect foreign investors from state action diminishing the value of their investments. By applying many of Weber's key themes associated with legal modernity - legitimacy, rationality, domination, bureaucracy, and charisma - the book conscripts tools of analysis that enable the testing of many of investment law's operating assumptions.

A Sociology of International Investment Law Law is premised on the belief that theory informs practice and that enlisting aspects of Weber's work illuminates the contemporary practice of, and debates over, international investment law. Utilizing Weber's themes and methods, results in a deeper appreciation of the connections of international investment law has with classical social theory. The book also reveals how the field fails to measure up to many of the analytical challenges that Weber's sociological interventions provoke. This book offers an exploration of the commonalities, differences, and blind spots shared by this relatively new international legal field with one of the most influential theorists of modernity.

Monebhurrun: Direito internacional dos investimentos e arbitragem

Nitish Monebhurrun (Univ. Center of Brasilia) has published Direito internacional dos investimentos e arbitragem (Pontes 2025). The book is available open access. Here's the abstract:

O primeiro panorama completo e atual do Direito Internacional dos Investimentos em língua portuguesa no Brasil. Nesta obra inédita, o leitor encontra uma análise abrangente e rigorosa do regime jurí­dico dos investimentos estrangeiros, reunindo em um único volume o estudo sistemático da jurisprudência arbitral internacional, da evolução dos tratados de investimentos e das principais correntes doutrinárias contemporâneas.

Com linguagem clara e precisão técnica, o autor examina desde os fundamen­tos históricos e conceituais do regime até suas controvérsias mais recentes — incluindo padrões de proteção, responsabilidades estatais, expropriação, tratamento justo e equitativo, e a interface com políticas públicas e desenvol­vimento sustentável.

O livro apresenta ainda um mapeamento atualizado das decisões arbitrais e dos acordos internacionais em vigor, oferecendo ao leitor uma visão integrada das transformações que moldam a prática atual da arbi­tragem de investimentos. Indispensável para pesquisadores, profissionais do direito internacional, árbitros, advogados, formuladores de políticas públicas e estudantes que buscam compreender, com profundidade e atualidade, um dos campos mais dinâmicos do direito global.

International Investment Law and Arbitration offers the first comprehensive and up-to-date overview of international investment law in Portuguese in Brazil. The volume provides a rigorous analysis of the legal regime governing foreign investments, bringing together a systematic study of international arbitral jurisprudence, the evolution of investment treaties, and the main contemporary doctrinal approaches.

Written with clarity and technical precision, the book examines the historical and conceptual foundations of the regime, its key standards of protection, and its most recent controversies, including the interface between investment law, public policies, and sustainable development.

Seminar: State Succession and ISDS

On September 22, 2025, a seminar will be held on "State Succession and ISDS," at the University of Vienna. Details are here.

Marceddu: EU Values in Investment Law and Policy: Promises of Democracy and Rule of Law?

Maria Laura Marceddu (Edinburgh Center for International and Global Law) has published EU Values in Investment Law and Policy: Promises of Democracy and Rule of Law? (Oxford Univ. Press 2025). Here's the abstract:

Is it possible that the EU premises of democracy and rule of law transform the global landscape of international investments? For realists, this is a calculated political move- an opportunity for the EU to shape the world according to the rules established in Brussels. To the most skeptical, the ambition to export these values might seem too grandiose, if not far-fetched, especially considering that the system somewhat displays these features already. Yet the more idealistic, like the author of this book, would find it fascinating, especially given the undeniable visionary component that has permeated the EU story since its beginning.

EU Values in Investment Law and Policy intends to carry this fire and continues to tell precisely that story of vision, ambition, and influence. Inspired by premises that have aspired to become promises of democracy and rule of law, the book critically examines how- and how far- these EU values extended their reach into international investment law and policy. While the book is not an ode to the EU, there is plenty that is admirable in the EU transmission efforts and is likely to leave an imprint on the investment regime's dynamics. It is these efforts that this book unravels to explain how the international investment system deficits are turned into an opportunity for normative change.

The book seeks to establish a solid analytical foundation to unpack the EU's evolving aspirations as a global leader in reimagining traditional investment rules. Through a careful critique of EU initiatives, it sheds light on the fine line between innovation and dogmatism, showing where the EU has genuinely (re)shaped and advanced international norms and where its bold rhetoric meets its limits.

For scholars, practitioners, and those intrigued by the intersection of law, policy, and global governance, EU Values in Investment Law and Policy offers a captivating exploration of how a visionary Europe continues to inspire change in international investment, setting the stage for a fairer and more value-driven global system.

Call for Papers: After the Backlash: The Future of Arbitration in the Settlement of Investment, Trade and Human Rights Disputes

A call for papers has been issued for a workshop on "After the Backlash: The Future of Arbitration in the Settlement of Investment, Trade and Human Rights Disputes," to take place September 19-20, 2025, in Quebec City. The call is here.

Cordonier Segger, Gleason, & Stephenson: Research Handbook on Investment Law and Sustainable Development

Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger (Univ. of Cambridge - Law), Ted Gleason (Grenoble Ecole de Management), & Sean Stephenson (Dentons Canada LLP) have published Research Handbook on Investment Law and Sustainable Development (Edward Elgar Publishing 2025). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

This cutting-edge Research Handbook examines how investment law and policy can foster or frustrate sustainable development goals and accords. Expert authors explore opportunities for environmental, social, and economic rules to shape international investment flows, advancing global sustainability and justice.

Featuring contributions from leading professors and practitioners, the Research Handbook analyzes innovative legal procedures including sustainability impact assessment, examines new treaty provisions advancing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and considers emerging practices in dispute resolution. Chapters evaluate evolving international investment rules in light of recent law and policy changes, outlining strategies for incentivizing more sustainable development. Ultimately, they argue that international law can and should guide investment decisions which affect human rights, environmental protection and poverty eradication.

Marrella: Arbitrage transnational d’investissement et conflits armés

Fabrizio Marrella (Università Ca' Foscari Venezia - Law) has published Arbitrage transnational d’investissement et conflits armés (Pedone 2025). Here's the abstract:

Le monde devient de plus en plus violent. On pense au conflit armé entre la Fédération de Russie et l'Ukraine, au coeur du continent européen, à la situation au Moyen-Orient ou encore en Afrique subsaharienne.

Le présent ouvrage traite pour la première fois exclusivement de l'arbitrage international des litiges liés aux investissements étrangers dans un contexte de conflit armé, national ou international. Les guerres du 21ème siècle ayant évolué pour dépasser les schémas traditionnels des conflits armés du 20ème siècle, les «nouvelles formes» d'utilisation de la force militaire, telles que la responsabilité de protéger, la «guerre contre le terrorisme» et la cyberguerre, doivent être prises en compte.

La première partie est consacrée aux effets des conflits armés sur les traités d'investissement et sur l'arbitrage mixte. Sont ainsi examinées les questions épineuses de compétence des tribunaux arbitraux d'investissement et de droit applicable au fond du litige en situation de guerre et d'occupation militaire.

La seconde partie traite des effets des conflits armés sur les règles secondaires de responsabilité. Ces éléments sont examinés sous l'angle du droit positif et de la pratique arbitrale, dans une perspective critique et prospective, dans le but de mieux comprendre le rôle du droit international humanitaire dans un contexte de contentieux arbitral.

Arato: The Institutions of Exceptions

Julian Arato (Univ. of Michigan - Law) has posted The Institutions of Exceptions (Michigan Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

International economic law binds states’ hands in the interest of liberalizing markets in various ways, including cross border trade in goods and services (trade) and capital (investment). The treaty regimes for both trade and investment do this by disciplining states through legal rules, while preserving a modicum of governmental power over policy. Though not always recognized as such, the preservation of policy space in these regimes typically involves exceptions-style reasoning by adjudicators – formally in the case of most trade and some investment treaties, and informally in the investment treaty regime more generally. This "exceptions paradigm" of justification has worked well in the trade regime, where it has been especially key to securing a workable balance between market disciplines and regulatory policy space in the WTO/GATT context. But it has been less successful at striking a reasonable balance in the investment regime – irrespective of whether the paradigm has been formally codified in an exceptions clause. This Article seeks to explain why, by focusing on the institutions within which this mode of justification is embedded. Certain institutional differences between these regimes help explain the varied success of exceptionalism in trade and investment, in particular: the right of action (public vs private); the degree of judicial centralization (ad hoc arbitration vs court system); and the available remedies (retrospective compensation vs prospective injunctive relief). I argue that it is trade law’s public-oriented institutions that have made the exceptions clause workable – not the other way around. By contrast, investment law’s private-oriented institutions make that system particularly inhospitable to exceptions-style justification.

Webinar: Litigating the Energy Charter Treaty

On December 9, 2024, the International Law Association Irish Branch will host a webinar on "Litigating the Energy Charter Treaty." The discussion will be on climate change policies and investor-state dispute settlement under the Energy Charter Treaty, legal options for states to exit the treaty, and compensating fossil fuel investors. Details are here. Registration is also possible here.

Fach Gómez & Titi: The Award in International Investment Arbitration

Katia Fach Gómez (Univ. of Zaragoza - Law) & Catharine Titi (Centre national de la recherche scientifique; Université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas) have published The Award in International Investment Arbitration (Oxford Univ. Press 2024). Here's the abstract:

The Award in International Investment Arbitration is a comprehensive study of the international investment award, which serves as a unique reference work and an authoritative one-stop resource on the topic for both practitioners and academics. The book reviews the award in a holistic manner: from award drafting to the procedural principles that govern it; from arbitral deliberations and tribunal dynamics to post-award challenges; from the role of gender in decision-making to the impact of tribunal secretaries. It puts emphasis on the practitioners needs with a careful selection of hands-on topics, such as fact-finding in complex disputes, the role of experts, and legal reasoning and persuasion. Sensitive to contemporary challenges, the book addresses both existing questions that have evolved over time and novel topics that have not yet received sufficient attention, such as the impact of technology on award drafting.

By bringing together the biggest names in the contemporary investment arbitration scene - a unique line-up of highly-qualified arbitrators and experts from academia and international legal practice - The Award in International Investment Arbitration offers a singular reservoir of knowledge and experience on the topic, drawn from a diverse set of angles and perspectives.

Conference: Forty-Second Investment Treaty Forum Public Conference

On November 8, 2024, the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will host, in person and online, the Forty-Second Investment Treaty Forum Public Conference. The theme is: "Illegality in International Investment Law." The program is here.

Workshop: Rethinking the Dimensions of International Economic Law

On September 13-14, 2024, the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University will host the Purdy Crawford Workshop on International Business Law. The theme is: "Rethinking the Dimensions of International Economic Law." The program is here. Registration is here.

Guntrip: Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Holding Foreign Investors Accountable for Violations of International Law

Edward Guntrip (Univ. of Sussex - Law) has published Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Holding Foreign Investors Accountable for Violations of International Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2024). Here's the abstract:

Foreign investors benefit from investment protection standards in international investment law which are enforceable in investment arbitration. However, international law does not directly bind foreign investors and investment arbitration struggles to address foreign investor misconduct. Thus, host States cannot easily claim against foreign investors for breaches of international law in investment arbitration. In Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration, Edward Guntrip illustrates how host States can use counterclaim procedures in investment arbitration to hold foreign investors accountable for misconduct that breaches international law. Based on arbitral practice, the book sets out how host States can amend their State practice and litigation strategies to enhance the effectiveness of counterclaim procedures and assesses when host States should take this course of action.

Schneiderman: Constitutional Review and International Investment Law: Deference or Defiance?

David Schneiderman (Univ. of Toronto - Law) has published Constitutional Review and International Investment Law: Deference or Defiance? (Oxford Univ. Press 2024). Here's the abstract:

The revival of interest in comparative constitutional studies, alongside the rise of legal limitations to state action due to investment treaty commitments, calls for a unique analysis of both investment law and comparative constitutional law. The unresolved tensions that arise between the two are only beginning to be addressed by judges. Are courts resisting these new international limitations on their constitutional space? Constitutional Review and International Investment Law: Deference or Defiance? pioneers this discussion by examining how a selection of the highest courts around the world have addressed this potential discord.

A comparison of decisions in the US, Europe, Colombia, Indonesia, Israel, and elsewhere reveals that, rather than issuing declarations of constitutional incompatibility, courts are more likely to respond to constitutional tensions indirectly. Their rulings adopt stances that range from hard deference (such as the Peruvian Constitutional Court viewing constitutional law and investment law as entirely compatible) to soft defiance (for example the Colombian Constitutional Court requiring only modest renegotiation of some treaty terms so that they are constitutionally compliant). Readers learn that judges are not aiming to undermine the investment law regime but are seeking to mitigate constitutional collision.

Call for Papers: South Asia International Economic Law Network Fourth Biennial Conference

A call for papers has been issued for the South Asia International Economic Law Network's Fourth Biennial Conference, to take place December 16-18, 2024, in Colombo. The theme is: "Local Approaches to International Economic Law." The call is here.

Call for Papers: Society of International Economic Law Ninth Biennial Conference

A call for papers has been issued for the Society of International Economic Law's ninth biennial conference, which will take place July 9-11, 2025, in Taipei, in collaboration with the National Taiwan University. The theme is: "Navigating New Horizons: International Economic Law in a Changing World." The call is here.

Monebhurrun, Olarte-Bácares, & Velásquez-Ruiz: International Investment Law and Arbitration from a Latin American Perspective

Nitish Monebhurrun (Univ. Center of Brasilia), Carolina Olarte-Bácares (Pontificia Universidad Javeriana), & Marco A. Velásquez-Ruiz (Pontificia Universidad Javeriana) have published International Investment Law and Arbitration from a Latin American Perspective (Springer 2024). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

The book brings to light how Latin American States have traditionally stood before the field of International Investment Law and Arbitration. It delves into their posture of resistance to critically examine how their perspective has gradually changed and how they have adapted their investment agreements so as not to leave their position as players in the field of International Investment Law.

Kulick: Constitutional Review of Investment Treaties by the European Court of Justice

Andreas Kulick (Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen - Law) has posted Constitutional Review of Investment Treaties by the European Court of Justice (in The Rise of Domestic Courts in International Investment Law, C Brown, M Jarrett, & SW Schill eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The review of investment treaties by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) tells a story of inconsistency. As is well known, the Court rejected investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the form of ad hoc arbitration in Achmea and Komstroy – and accepted it in the Investment Court System (‘ICS’) variety of the Canada-EU Free Trade Agreement (‘CETA’) in its Opinion 1/17. Taking a closer look at the various lines and subplots of this story, however, reveals three common themes. First, the CJEU’s review of investment treaties is a constitutional review not only in name but also in substance. It charges the law of internal and external EU commercial relations with the ‘values’ of Art. 2 TEU and thus introduces a ‘thick constitutionalism’ to this otherwise seemingly unspectacular area of EU policy: The Court does not merely insist on a review that may be characterized as constitutional in form – based on normative hierarchy and setting a floor and a ceiling to what is compatible with EU law. It also insists that it is tasked to protect the ‘values’ of the Union and makes them doctrinally operational by way of its – self-styled – role as exclusive guardian of the EU legal system. Second, such ‘thick constitutionalism’ provides an explanation for the doctrinal inconsistency in the Court’s jurisprudence. Promoting the ‘values’ of Art. 2 TEU in EU external relations requires a strategy of Voice, rather than Exit – and Opinion 1/17 enables the Commission and the Member States (in mixed agreements) to exercise such voice. Third, the impact of such ‘thick constitutionalism’ and the CJEU’s intention to provide the EU with Voice in its external economic relations vis-à-vis ISDS has repercussions regarding the Union’s agenda and wriggle-room in the current debates on ISDS reform in UNCITRAL Working Group III and in its current and future treaty practice.

Part II briefly recounts the main plot of this story, marking three milestones in the development of the CJEU’s case law thus far. In Part III, I will analyse and assess the Court’s jurisprudence with respect to the constitutional stakes it raises (III.1.) and regarding the different strategy it employs in order to ‘integrate’ the Union’s values also into its external commercial relations (III.2.). Part IV discusses how the Court’s ‘thick constitutionalism’ may impact the future of ISDS, both regarding the institutional and procedural matters as well as with respect to the substance of international investment agreements (‘IIAs’). Part V concludes.

Brewster: Arbitrating Corruption

Rachel Brewster (Duke Univ. - Law) has published Arbitrating Corruption (Washington Univ. Law Review, Vol. 101, 2024). Here's the abstract:

One of the most controversial issues in international investment law is how arbitral panels should deal with investments tainted by corruption at their inception. The current practice of investment arbitrators is to refuse to hear investors’ claims when bribery allegations are substantiated. A recent wave of scholarship has attacked this “corruption defense,” arguing that the practice unfairly harms investors and encourages governments to maintain corrupt practices. This Essay responds to that scholarship, arguing that the current approach is the best policy choice on balance. The Essay analyzes three core policy questions at the heart of the debate: Would eliminating the corruption defense lead governments to adopt meaningful anti-corruption reform? Does corrupt foreign investment improve economic and political conditions in the host states to a sufficient degree to warrant investment protection? Do the governments establishing investment treaties that set the contractual terms between states want investment protections for corrupt investment? In answering all three questions in the negative and placing the issue within the broader context of transnational anti-corruption law, this Essay provides the theoretical foundation necessary for supporting the current practice.