The fair and equitable treatment standard : a guide to NAFTA case law on article 1105
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the entry into force of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, several arbitral tribunals have rendered awards dealing with claims of breach of Article 1105. Some of these awards have been very controversial and have had a tremendous impact on the development of the concept of fair and equitable treatment (FET) and the evolution of international investment law. Yet, in spite of the fundamental importance of these awards, no comprehensive study had been undertaken to determine the meaning and the content of the FET standard under NAFTA Article 1105. This book’s systematic analysis of the provision and its case law fills this analytical gap. Because Article 1105 is in many ways different from typical FET clauses contained within most investment treaties, the author examines the particular parameters under which it must be interpreted. He also analyzes how these specific features have influenced NAFTA tribunals’ interpretation of the provision, and how their assessments differ from awards rendered by other tribunals outside NAFTA. Among the issues treated in the course of the analysis are the following: the origin, development, nature and content of the concept of the ‘minimum standard of treatment’ and its interaction with the FET standard; the specific parameters under which Article 1105 must be interpreted, including contextual elements such as subsequent agreement and practice between the NAFTA Parties on matters of interpretation; the context in which the Free Trade Commission issued its Note of Interpretation in 2001 and how NAFTA tribunals have applied it; whether or not the concepts of legitimate expectations, transparency, arbitrary conduct, discriminatory conduct, good faith, denial of justice, and due process have been considered by NAFTA tribunals as specific elements of protection to be accorded to investors under Article 1105; the many facets of these elements and the threshold of severity that NAFTA tribunals have required for finding a breach of Article 1105; the interaction between Article 1105 and other NAFTA provisions on national treatment, Most-Favored-Nation treatment, and expropriation; and how NAFTA tribunals have assessed damages for breach of Article 1105. This comprehensive guide to NAFTA case law on Article 1105 is an important contribution to the on-going controversial debate about the scope and content of the FET standard under international law. It will be of great interest to counsel for investors and States as well as to arbitrators, academics and anyone interested in investor-State arbitration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".