The publication contains an explanation of Most Favored Nation (MFN) treatment and some of the key issues that arise in its negotiation, particularly the scope and application of MFN treatment to the liberalization and protection of foreign investors in recent treaty practice. The paper provides policy options as regards the traditional application of MFN treatment and identifies reactions by States to the unexpected broad use of MFN treatment, and provides several drafting options, such as specifying or narrowing down the scope of application of MFN treatment to certain types of activities, clarifying the nature of "treatment" under the IIA, clarifying the comparison that an arbitral tribunal needs to undertake as well as a qualification of the comparison "in like circumstances" or excluding its use in investor-State cases.

This book outlines the protection standards typically contained in international investment agreements as they are actually applied and interpreted by investment tribunals. It thus provides a basis for analysis, criticism, and stocktaking of the existing system of investment arbitration. It covers all main protection standards, such as expropriation, fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, the non-discrimination standards of national treatment and MFN, the prohibition of unreasonable and discriminatory measures, umbrella clauses and transfer guarantees. These standards are covered in separate chapters providing an overview of textual variations, explaining the origin of the standards and analysing the main conceptual issues as developed by investment tribunals. Relevant cases with quotations that illustrate how tribunals have relied upon the standards are presented in depth. An extensive bibliography guides the reader to more specific aspects of each investment standard permitting the book's use as a commentary of the main investment protection standards.

The Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy is a one-stop reference source. This Handbook covers the main conceptual questions in a logical, scholarly yet easy to comprehend manner. It is based on a truly global vision insisting particularly on Global South related issues and developments. In this respect, the Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy provides an excellent modern treatment of international investment law which is one of the fastest growing areas of international economic law. Professor Julien Chaisse, Professor Leïla Choukroune, and Professor Sufian Jusoh are the editors-in-chief of the Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy, a 1,500-page reference book, which is anticipated becoming one of the most influenced reference books in the international economic law areas. This Handbook is a highly comprehensive set of four volumes of original materials designed to cover all facets of international investment law and policy. The chapters, written by world-leading experts, explore key ideas and debates in relation to: international investment substantive law (Volume I), Investor-state dispute settlement (Volume II); interaction between international investment law and other fields of international law (Volume III); and, the new trends and challenges for international investment law (Volume IV). The Handbook will feature more than 80 contributions from leading experts (academics, lawyers, government officials), including Vivienne Bath, M. Sornarajah, Mélida Hodgson, Rahul Donde, Roberto Echandi, Andrew Mitchell, Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Christina L. Beharry, Krista Nadakavukaren Schefer, Leon Trakman, Prabhash Ranjan, Emmanuel Jacomy, Mariel Dimsey, Stavros Brekoulakis, Romesh Weeramantry, Nathalie Bernasconi-Osterwalder, David Collins, Damilola S. Olawuyi, Katia Fach Gomez, Jaemin Lee, Alejandro Carballo-Leyda, Patrick W. Pearsall, Mark Feldman, Surya Deva, Luke Nottage, Rafael Leal-Arcas, James Nedumpara, Rodrigo Polanco, etc. This Handbook will be an essential reference tool for students and scholars of international economic law. Policy makers and researchers alike will find the Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy useful for years to come.

Das Meistbegünstigungsprinzip (engl. "Most favoured nation", MFN) ist ein integraler Bestandteil praktisch aller heutigen Investitionssysteme. MFN-Klauseln in internationalen Investitionsabkommen signalisieren Anlegern staatlichen Schutz vor Diskriminierung. Ihre Durchsetzung in der Praxis ist nicht immer unproblematisch. Das Buch stellt die Funktionsweisen der Meistbegünstigung als Standard des internationalen Investitionsrechts umfassend dar. Ausgehend der Entwicklung des Konzepts im internationalen Recht, bietet die Autorin einen Überblick über die bestehenden staatlichen Praktiken bei der Aushandlung der MFN-Klauseln in bilateralen und internationalen Investitionsverträgen. Schließlich analysiert die Arbeit MFN-Klauseln auf ihr Potenzial hin, Diskriminierung zu verhindern und den "Import" von materiellen Schutzrechten in internationalen staatlichen Schiedsverfahren für Investoren zu ermöglichen.

The open access publication of this book has been published with the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation. In The Interpretation and Application of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause in Investment Arbitration, Dr. Anqi Wang provides suggestions for MFN drafting in future international investment agreements (IIAs), as well as for MFN application by investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals in case of ambiguity. Dr. Wang conducts a systemic review of MFN clause in history and maps all the relevant ISDS cases. She argues that ISDS tribunals should interpret the MFN clause according to the treaty text on a case-by-case basis, and that tribunals should also consider state consent as the foundation for the jurisdiction of international adjudication, current IIA reform, and essential treaty interpretive principles.

These two categories of exception reflect the types of risks considered by the signatory states (at the time the BIT is made) in the event of the limitless application of MFN. [...] The tribunal arrived at this conclusion based on two main arguments: first, the preamble to the basic BIT referred to the notion of FET and second, the MFN clause was written in a sufficiently vague manner as to authorize this interpretation.37 In MTD Equity v. Chile, the investor claimed the benefit of an obligation to grant the "necessary permits" provided for in the Chile-Denmark (1993) and Chi [...] The ICSID tribunal accepted the investor's claim on the grounds that this interpretation was in line with the object and purpose in the preamble of the basic BIT, to "protect and create a climate that is more favourable to investment." It also concluded that exceptions to MFN in favour of regional integration organizations and fiscal arrangements in the Chile-Malaysia BIT meant, conversely, that a [...] Indeed, to the question of whether article 4.2 (MFN) of the India-Australia BIT permitted the incorporation of article 4.5 of the India-Kuwait BIT, the tribunal responded affirmatively, ruling that:40 This does not "subvert" the negotiated balance of the BIT. [...] The same question could arise for the investor's definition of the spatial application of the treaty or the exclusion of certain matters from the scope of the BIT.

The book argues that international investment law is a structured body of law based on uniform principles of investment protection.

Master's Thesis from the year 2009 in the subject Law - European and International Law, Intellectual Properties, grade: B+, University of Auckland, course: International Arbitration, language: English, abstract: Since 1959, the year in which the first Bilateral Investment Treaty (hereinafter BIT) was concluded, the number of BITs has increased to roundly 2500. The rapid growth of that number spells out the outstanding role BITs nowadays play in the global investment protection regime. Typically the host country has not only entered into a BIT with one country but a number of other countries as well. Due to numerous reasons the BITs concluded by the host country often differ in their wording, scope and the guaranteed range of rights. In order to prevent a discrimination and to ensure a balanced competition in the country’s market with equal opportunities for all market players almost all BITs provide for a so-called Most-Favoured-Nation clause (hereinafter MFN clause). Subject to certain limits such a MFN clause, in principle, operates as follows: as soon as the host state accords a more favourable treatment to a third party in another BIT (third party treaty) the party of the basic treaty can rely on the MFN clause to demand the same treatment. Hence, the most favourable treatment agreed upon with one state automatically sets up the standard for the treatment of any other country given that its BIT contains a MFN clause. Although it might be problematic as to what extent a basic treaty can be altered by the operation of MFN clauses, it is commonly accepted that they principally can allow for the incorporation of more favourable substantial rights. However, most BITs do not only address substantial matters but provide for dispute settlement procedures as well. It was the year 2000 when an arbitration tribunal in fact dealt with such a claim for the first time in detail. The pendent dispute gave rise to a question that surprisingly has scraped a shadowy existence before: Are MFN clauses also able to import procedural rights from one BIT to another? Although the competent tribunal in the now-famous Maffezini decision argued in favour of an application with respect to procedural rights the issue today is still alien from being clarified, since other tribunals subsequently have expressly resisted following the Maffezini decision. The divergent decisions caused great legal uncertainty which is not least due to the textual breadth of the MFN clauses the different tribunals had to deal with. The following essay seeks to “bring light into this legal darkness”.

Analysing how arbitral tribunals have dealt with the value judgment at the core of the distinction between 'objectionable' and 'unobjectionable' treaty shopping, this book suggests how States could reform their international investment agreements in order to make them less susceptible to the practice of treaty shopping.