MONTENEGRO RECAP: THE STANDARD OF FAIR AND EQUITABLE TREATMENT (FET) AS A CATALYST FOR INVESTMENT DISPUTES

Nikolina Tomović

doi:10.56461/SPZ_24406KJ

Autori

Nikolina Tomović Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Crnog Gori, Podgorica

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56461/SPZ_24406KJ

Ključne reči:

fer i pravičan tretman, investicije, EU, FET standard, Crna Gora.

Apstrakt

Standard fer i pravičnog tretmana (FET) je jedan od najznačajnijih, ali i najviše diskutovanih standarda u oblasti zaštite stranih investicija. Iako je njegova formulacija često široka i nejasna, definicija ovog standarda se uglavnom nalazi u arbitražnim odlukama koje su zasnovane na činjenicama svakog pojedinog slučaja. Ovaj rad analizira odredbe fer i pravičnog tretmana u bilateralnim investicionim sporazumima Crne Gore, a u kontekstu njenog pristupanja Evropskoj uniji i savremenih pristupa regulisanju standarda fer i pravičnog tretmana stranih investicija. Analizom crnogorskih bilateralnih investicionih sporazuma i pregledom dosadašnjih sporova Crne Gore, ovaj rad istražuje ključne aspekte primjene standarda fer i pravičnog tretmana u dosadašnjoj praksi rješavanja sporova između Crne Gore i stranih investitora. S obzirom na to da se ovaj standard javlja kao jedno od glavnih pitanja u skoro svim sporovima pokrenutim protiv Crne Gore, analiza podvlači potrebu da se preispita i precizira njegovo regulisanje u crnogorskim bilateralnim investicionim sporazumima, kako bi se osigurala bolja zaštita stranih investicija i razjasnilo koje radnje države podrazumijevaju kršenje ovog standarda. U radu se dalje porede crnogorske odredbe o fer i pravičnom tretmanu stranih investicija sa takvim odredbama usvojenim na nivou EU, uz preporuke za usklađivanje regulisanja ovog standarda po ugledu na snažnije regulatorne okvire.

##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##

##plugins.generic.usageStats.noStats##

Reference

Beaumont, B., Brodlija, F., Ashdown, R. & Terrien, A., 2024. The Future of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Reforming Law, Practice and Perspectives for a Fast-Changing World . Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer.

Brodlija, F. 2024. The Multilateral Investment Court: Necessary ISDS Reform or Self-Fulfilling Prophecy? Arbitration Law Review, 15(1), pp. 1-18.

Dumberry, P. 2020. A Guide to General Principles of Law in International Investment Arbitration. Oxford International Arbitration Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198857075.001.0001

Dumberry, P. 2023. The cost of inaction: arbitral practice in respect of earlier generation FET clauses and current approaches to FET clauses. Paris : OECD. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4872672 (10. 7. 2024). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4872672

Jacob, M. & Schill, S. W. 2015. Fair and Equitable Treatment: Content, Practice, Method. In: Bungenberg, M., Griebel, J., Hobe, S. & Reinsch, A. (eds.). International Investment Law: A Handbook. Baden-Baden : Nomos, pp. 749-812. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845258997-749

Jovanović, M. 2022. Doprinos Mihaila Konstantinovića modernizaciji jugoslovenske privrede - stvaranje Spoljnotrgovinske arbitraže. Anali Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu, 70(5), pp. 159-182. https://doi.org/10.51204/Anali_PFBU_22MK07A

Kirkman, C. 2002. Fair and Equitable Treatment: Methanex v. United Stated and the Narrowing Scope of NAFTA Article 1105. Law and Policy in International Business Journal, 34, p. 343.

Levashova, Y. 2019. The Right of States to Regulate in International Investment Law: The Search for Balance between Public Interest and Fair and Equitable Treatment. International Arbitration Law Library. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.

Mann, A. F. 1981. British Treaties for the Formation and Protection of Investment. British Yearbook of International. Law, 52(1), pp. 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1093/bybil/52.1.241

Reuter, A. 2021. Taking Investors’ Rights Seriously: The Achmea and CETA Rulings of the European Court of Justice do not Bar Intra-EU Investment Arbitration. ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, 36(1), pp. 33-45. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siaa044

Reinisch, A. & Schreuer C. 2020. Fair and Equitable Treatment. In: Reinisch A. & Schreuer C. (eds.), International Protection of Investments - The Substantive Standards. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 251-535. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139004978.004

Rubins, N., Papanastasiou, T. & Kinsella, N. S. 2020. International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner's Guide. Oxford International Arbitration Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198808053.001.0001

Sarmiento, F. & Nikièma, S. 2022. Fair and Equitable Treatment: Why it matters and what can be done. Winnipeg, Canada. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). Available at: https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-11/fair-equitable-treatment-en.pdf (12 July 2024).

Schreuer, C. 2005. Fair and Equitable Treatment in Arbitral Practice. Journal of World Investment & Trade, 6(3), pp. 357-386. https://doi.org/10.1163/221190005X00118

Shan, W. 2012. General Standards of Treatment. In: Shan, W. et al. (eds.), The Legal Protection of Foreign Investment a Comparative Study. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Spaić, A. 2023. Achmea Ripple Effect and its Reverberations in the Investment Worlds. University of Montenegro Law Journal, 46(23), pp. 65-81.

Titi, C. 2022. The Right to Regulate in International Investment Law (Revisited). Moscow, Russia. International and Comparative Law Research Center. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4058447, 12. 7. 2024.

Tudor, I. 2008. The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard in the International Law of Foreign Investment. Oxford Monographs in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199235063.001.0001

UNCTAD. 2012. Fair and Equitable Treatment. UNCTAD Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements II. Available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/unctaddiaeia2011d5_en.pdf (12 July 2024).

Wong, J. 2006. Umbrella Clauses in Bilateral Investment Treaties: Of Breaches of Contract, Treaty Violations, and the Divide between Developing and Developed Countries in Foreign Investment Disputes. George Mason Law Review, 14, pp. 137–176.

Živković, V. 2023. Fair and Equitable treatment and the Rule of Law. Elgar International Investment Law series. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904369

Internet Sources

Ankersmit, L. 2018. Achmea: The Beginning of the End for ISDS in and with Europe? Investment Treaty News. Available at: https://www.iisd.org/itn/en/2018/04/24/achmea-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-isds-in-and-with-europe-laurens-ankersmit/, 10. 7. 2024.

CDM. 2024. Šta je IBAR i zbog čega je važan za Crnu Goru? Available at: https://www.cdm.me/politika/sta-je-ibar-i-zbog-cega-je-vazan-za-crnu-goru/, 10. 7. 2024.

Central Bank of Montenegro. 2024. Available at: https://www.cbcg.me/, 13. 10. 2024.

Croisant, G. 2024. Multilateral Investment Court. Jus Mundi. Available at: https://jusmundi.com/en/document/publication/en-multilateral-investment-court, 10. 7. 2024.

Forbes SRB. 2024. Srbija najveći investitor u Crnoj Gori u 2023. uprkos velikom padu ulaganja u tu zemlju. Available at: https://forbes.n1info.rs/novac/srbija-najveci-investitor-u-crnoj-gori-u-2023/, 10. 7. 2024.

Fouchard, C. & Krestin, M. 2018. The Judgment of the CJEU in Slovak Republic v. Achmea – A Loud Clap of Thunder on the Intra-EU BIT Sky. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Available at: https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/03/07/the-judgment-of-the-cjeu-in-slovak-republic-v-achmea/, 10. 7. 2024.

Fouchard, C. & Thieffry, V. 2021. CJEU Ruling in Moldova v. Komstroy: the End of Intra-EU Investment Arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty (and a Restrictive Interpretation of the Notion of Protected Investment). Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Available at: https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2021/09/07/cjeu-ruling-in-moldova-v-komstroy-the-end-of-intra-eu-investment-arbitration-under-the-energy-charter-treaty-and-a-restrictive-interpretation-of-the-notion-of-protected-investment/, 10. 7. 2024.

Hindelang, S. 2018. The Limited Immediate Effects of CJEU’s Achmea Judgement. Verfassungsblog. Available at: https://verfassungsblog.de/the-limited-immediate-effects-of-cjeus-achmea-judgement/, 10. 7. 2024.

MINA BUSINESS. 2024. Arbitražni postupci još nijesu zaživjeli u Crnoj Gori. Available at: https://mina.news/mina-business-ekonomske-vijesti-iz-crne-gore/arbitrazni-postupci-jos-nijesu-zazivjeli-u-crnoj-, 13. 10. 2024.

Nacimiento, P., Scharaw, B. & Lui, J. 2024. European Commission Publishes Non-Paper of Model Clauses for Member States’ Bilateral Investment Agreements with Third Countries. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Available at: https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2024/02/19/european-commission-publishes-non-paper-of-model-clauses-for-member-states-bilateral-investment-agreements-with-third-countries/, 5. 9. 2024.

Case Law

Addiko Bank AG v. Montenegro (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/35).

AES Summit Generation Limited and AES-Tisza Erömü Kft v. The Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/22).

Bilcon of Delaware Inc. and others v. Government of Canada (PCA Case No. 2009-04, 2015).

Bivac BV v. Paraguay (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/9).

Biwater Gauff v. Tanzania (ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22).

CEAC Holdings Limited v. Montenegro (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/8).

CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentina (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8).

David Minnotte v. Poland (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/10/1).

L.F.H. Neer and Pauline Neer (U.S.A.) v. United Mexican States (United States-Mexican General Claims Commission, 1926).

Lone Pine Resources Inc. v. Government of Canada (ICSID Case No. UNCT/15/2, Award, 2022).

Medusa (Montenegro) Limited v. Montenegro (PCA Case No. 2015-39).

MNSS B.V. and Recupero Credito Acciaio N.V v. Montenegro (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/8).

Mondev International Ltd. v. United States of America (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/2, 2002).

Mondev v. USA (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/2).

Noble Ventures, Inc. v. Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/11).

Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska v. the State of Montenegro (PCA Case No. 2017-07).

Republic of Moldova v. Komstroy (CJEU, C-741/19).

Saluka Investments BV v. The Czech Republic (UNCITRAL, Final Award, 2006).

SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A. v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/13).

SGS Société Générale de Surveillance S.A. v. Republic of the Philippines (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/6).

Siemens A.G. v. Republic of Argentina (ICSID Case ARB/02/8).

Slovak Republic v. Achmea B.V. (CJEU, Case C-284/16).

Legal Sources

Agreement between Montenegro and the Republic of Serbia on Mutual Encouragement and Protection of Investments (2009).

Agreement between Serbia and Montenegro and The Republic of Cyprus on Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (2005).

Agreement between the Council of Ministers of Serbia and Montenegro and the Government of the Republic of Lithuania on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (2005).

Agreement between the Federal Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Government of The Republic of Poland on Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (1997).

Agreement between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and The Kingdom of Spain on Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (2002).

Agreement between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Kingdom of Spain on Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (2002).

Agreement between the Government of Montenegro and the Government of the Republic of Moldova on Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (2014).

Agreement between the Government of Montenegro and the Government of Malta for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (2010).

Agreement between the Government of Montenegro and the State of Qatar for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (2009).

Agreement between the Government of the Czech Republic and the Federal Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (1997).

Agreement between the Government of the Hellenic Republic and the Federal Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (1997).

Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Turkey and the Government of Montenegro Concerning the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments (2012).

Agreement between the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Federal Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (1996).

Agreement between the Republic of Finland and Montenegro on the Promotion and Protection of Investments (2008).

Agreement between the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia and the Federal Republic of Germany on Reciprocal Protection and Promotion of Investments (1989).

Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and Serbia and Montenegro on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (2005).

Agreement for the Termination of Bilateral Investment Treaties between the Member States of the European Union, OJ L 169/1, 29 May 2020.

Agreement on Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (2002).

Agreement on the Promotion and Protection of Investment between Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (2001).

EU-Singapore Investment Protection Agreement (2018), OJ L 294/3, 14 November 2019.

Montenegrin Law on Arbitration, Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 047/15 of 18 August 2015.

The Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement - CETA (OJ L 11/24, 14 January 2017. pp. 23-1079).

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.