CYIL 2013

VOJTĚCH TRAPL CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ The authors have come to the conclusion that international investment law is indeed a significant part of international economic law, although international standards of investment law and practice are not stabilized yet. The authors therefore deal with the reasons why standards on governing international investment law are not an element of universal binding international law (customary law) – and thus it is likely to be assumed that these standards are based mainly on particular rules of international law. The particular rules of international law are constituted by international treaty instruments, both on bilateral investment promotion and protection (BIT) and treaties on friendship, commerce and navigation (FCN), or multilateral agreements, including, first, the 1965 Washington Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), further the 1994 International Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), the 1994 Agreement of the WTO (TRIMS), alongside the regional conventions under free trade agreements (NAFTA, CAFTA, MERCOSUR, ASEAN etc.) that also protect the investment of foreign nationals in the host country on the basis of contractual obligations established by the subjects of international law. The monograph is separately devoted to the protection of investment by the European Union, as well as within the Union, after that the Lisbon Treaty (TFEU) entered into force on 1 December 2009. The monograph shows the current practice that is represented by many investment arbitration tribunals, and it gives examples of the practice of international judicial bodies, combining selected decisions of institutional arbitration tribunals (particularly the Washington Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, ICSID), as well as of ad hoc arbitral tribunals (specifically UNCITRAL) by enumerating various institutes and standards of investment protection. The general character of international investment law is not constituted by a common practice of judicial impartial international bodies, notably by arbitral tribunals, because, first, it is not based on the principle of precedent ( stare decisis principle ) and it lacks any common international judiciary; second, it is essentially inconsistent, because of the compromising of diverse international authorities which are called upon to decide disputes arising from international investments according to the international treaty instruments. The monograph uses excerpts from a large number of foreign theoretical works, giving their full summary in its closing part and refers to the sources in the text. It makes reference to various and relevant decisions of the International Court of Justice in particular, as well as of the arbitral tribunals. The authors have made valuable conclusions and recommendations both to the behavior of states and the decision-making practice of arbitration tribunals. With respect to this very competent work and its very skilled, tight and clear content, the monograph cannot but be recommended for everyday use in the