Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) Standard in International Investment Arbitration pp 31–52Cite as

The Historical Development of the FET Standard in International Investment Treaties

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1033 Accesses

Part of the book series: International Law and the Global South ((ILGS))

Abstract

A study of the historical development of the FET standard shows that the standard emerged under the auspices of multinational treaties which never came into force, but it survived with a grand success due to the fact that the capita exporting developed countries advanced the development of the standard in multilateral agreements and have pushed it forward in numerous bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with their developing country counterpart. This is evidenced by events that have contributed to the development of the standard in various investment treaties , and especially when the role played by developed and developing countries is examined in the process of drafting and adoption of these treaties. These events are important to understand the discussions made in the subsequent chapters of the book as it discusses, in chronological order, selected events that have influenced the inclusion of the FET standard as well as its language in different investment agreements and treaties at the regional, multilateral or bilateral level. Initially, many developing countries , particularly those from Latin America , appeared hostile to these developments, but developing countries increasingly have acquiesced to the inclusion of the FET standard, and now, it has become an almost ever-present feature of international investment law .

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Vandevelde (1993, p. 624); Vandevelde (2005, p. 158). See, e.g., US–Spain Treaty of Friendship, Limits and Navigation, 27 October 1795; US–Great Britain Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, 19 November 1794; US–Morocco Treaty of Peace and Friendship, January 1787; US–Prussia Treaty of Amity and Commerce, July 1785; US–Sweden Treaty of Amity and Commerce, 3 April 1783; US–The Netherlands Treaty of Amity and Commerce, 8 October 1782; US–France Treaty of Amity and Commerce, 6 February 1778.

  2. 2.

    For details, see, e.g., Vandevelde (2005, p. 158).

  3. 3.

    Full text of the Havana Charter can be found at webpage http://www.worldtradelaw.net/document.php?id=misc/havana.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  4. 4.

    See, e.g., Vasciannie (1999, p. 110).

  5. 5.

    Article I of the Havana Charter , 1948.

  6. 6.

    International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, Vol. I (UNCTAD 1996), p. 4, webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  7. 7.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 110).

  8. 8.

    Aust (2007, p. 31).

  9. 9.

    On the discussion on politics behind the Havana Charter , see, e.g., Subedi (2014, pp. 732–733).

  10. 10.

    Text of the agreement can be found at webpage http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/sigs/a-43.html last accessed 22 May 2018.

  11. 11.

    A significant majority of the multilateral and regional treaties and draft treaties are articulated in a different manner, clearly stating that the host country is liable only to the investors of other contracting parties, e.g., Article 1(a), Draft OECD Convention; Article 1, Draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI); Article 1105, NAFTA ; Article 10, Energy Charter Treaty ; Article IV (2), ASEAN Treaty.

  12. 12.

    For discussion on the draft Bogota Agreement, see, e.g., Dennett and Turner (1948); Rubin (1956, p. 82); Nwogugu (1965, p. 141).

  13. 13.

    US FCN treaties with Ireland (1950), Greece (1954), Israel (1954), France (1960), Pakistan (1961), Belgium (1963) and Luxembourg (1963) contained the express assurance that foreign persons, properties, enterprises and other interests would receive ‘equitable treatment’ while others, including those with the Federal Republic of Germany, Ethiopia and the Netherlands, used the terms ‘fair and equitable treatment ’ for a similar set of items involved in the foreign investment process. See, e.g., Tudor (2008, p. 19).

  14. 14.

    Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation, 29 October 1954, US-Federal Republic of Germany, 273 UNTS 4.

  15. 15.

    Treaty of Friendship and Commerce and Navigation between the USA and the Republic of China, signed at Nanking, 4 November 1946, came into force on 30 November 1948; for text, see (1949) 43(1) The American Journal of International Law 27.

  16. 16.

    The Draft Convention represented a private initiative by a number of European businessmen and lawyers and headed by Hermann Abs and Lord Shawcross. Text can be found at webpage http://unctad.org/Sections/dite_tobedeleted/iia/docs/compendium/en/137%20volume%205.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  17. 17.

    See, e.g., Larson (1960), especially see pp. 172–175.

  18. 18.

    Ibid., p. 172.

  19. 19.

    Pakistan–Germany BIT, signed on 25 November 1959 and entered into force on 28 November 1962; for text of the treaty, see webpage http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/investment_pakistan_germany.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  20. 20.

    For a listing of several countries that entered into BITs in the 1960s, see Vandevelde (2005, pp. 169–170). Also for a brief account of the development of the American BIT programme, see Vandevelde (1988, p. 209).

  21. 21.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 125) citing Denza and Brooks (1987); also, see, e.g., Salacuse (2010, pp. 88–90).

  22. 22.

    See, e.g., Vandevelde (1992, pp. 19–20); Vandevelde (1993, pp. 624–625).

  23. 23.

    See, e.g., Subedi (2014, p. 729). Historically, these developing countries favoured the Calvo doctrine , while developed countries suggested state responsibility should protect the foreign investors. See, e.g., Subedi (2012, p. 72).

  24. 24.

    The Argentinian jurist and diplomat Carlos Calvo established the principle that foreigners’ are entitled to no better treatment than nationals of a host state and that the exclusive jurisdiction of the host state ’s courts should establish the rights of foreigners. Thus, the doctrine stated that customary international law did not require that the expropriation undertaken by the host country should be accompanied by ‘prompt, adequate and effective compensation ’. The popular ‘ Calvo Doctrine ’ gained huge popularity among the Latin American states in relation to treatment of aliens. The doctrine also later found its apogee in the UN General Assembly resolutions relating to the New International Economic Order in the 1970s. See, e.g., Article 2(2) (c) of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States. On the Calvo doctrine , see generally, e.g., Shea (1955); Shan (2008, p. 247); Lipstein (1945); Dolzer (1981); Weston (1981).

  25. 25.

    Subedi (2014, p. 730).

  26. 26.

    Schill (2009, p. 42).

  27. 27.

    Walker (1956, p. 230).

  28. 28.

    Vandevelde (1992, pp. 14–19).

  29. 29.

    For a detailed discussion, see, e.g., Vandevelde (1993, pp. 624–625). For a detail discussion on later US FCN treaties, see, e.g., Hawkins (1951); Walker (1956, 1958); Wilson (1949, 1951, 1953, 1956).

  30. 30.

    Vandevelde (1993, p. 624); Vandevelde (1992, p. 19).

  31. 31.

    In contrast, the first wave of US BITs mostly existed between the USA and developing countries that had not necessarily been associated with the economic policy of Western Europe or the USA. See, e.g., Vandevelde (1993, p. 627).

  32. 32.

    The last two FCNs were signed in 1966. See, e.g., US–Togo Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations, 8 February 1966; and US–Thailand Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations and Exchange of Notes, 27 May 1966.

  33. 33.

    See, e.g., Vasciannie (1999, pp. 109–112).

  34. 34.

    See, e.g., Walker (1956, p. 229, 231).

  35. 35.

    For the text of the 1963 Draft Convention, see (1963) 2 International Legal Materials 211–267.

  36. 36.

    OECD Draft Convention on the Protection of Foreign Property 1967, OECD Publication No. 23081, reprinted in (1968) 7 International Legal Materials 117–143.

  37. 37.

    OECD Draft Convention on the Protection of Foreign Property , 1967 reprinted in (1968) 7 International Legal Materials 117, 119.

  38. 38.

    International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, supra note 6, p. xxi webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018

  39. 39.

    See, e.g., Vasciannie (1999, p. 112).

  40. 40.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 120). Also, see generally, e.g., Vandevelde (1997–98); Vasciannie (1992).

  41. 41.

    See, e.g., Fair and Equitable Treatment : UNCTAD Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements II (UNCTAD 2012) webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/unctaddiaeia2011d5_en.pdf last accessed 12 June 2018.

  42. 42.

    Schill (2009, p. 37).

  43. 43.

    Subedi (2014, p. 733).

  44. 44.

    On the politics and economics connected with the NIEO , see, e.g., Bhagwati (1978); Hart (1983).

  45. 45.

    Subedi (2014, p. 735); generally see, e.g., Hossain (ed) (1980).

  46. 46.

    See Sinclair (2004, p. 432).

  47. 47.

    Dolzer and Stevens (1995, p. 2).

  48. 48.

    Walker (1956, p. 229, 241).

  49. 49.

    Schill (2009, p. 39).

  50. 50.

    See, e.g., Denza and Brooks (1987, p. 910).

  51. 51.

    Gudgeon (1986, p. 111).

  52. 52.

    Dolzer and Stevens (1995, p. 2) et seq. pointing out that ‘OECD countries have continued to review their policies in this respect within the OECD Committee on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises’.

  53. 53.

    See, e.g., Report of the Centre on Transnational Corporations on Work on the Formulation of the United Nations Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations, U.N. Doc E/C. 10/1985/s/2 Excerpted in Henkin et al. (1987, pp. 1049–1051).

  54. 54.

    Henkin et al. (1987, p. 90).

  55. 55.

    For details on CERDS , see webpage http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cerds/cerds.html last accessed 22 May 2018.

  56. 56.

    Vandevelde (1992, p. 21); Vandevelde (1993, p. 625).

  57. 57.

    Vandevelde (1993, p. 625).

  58. 58.

    See, e.g., Vandevelde (1992, pp. 29–31).

  59. 59.

    Bronfman (2006, p. 625).

  60. 60.

    International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, supra note 6, p. 172 webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018. The brackets are original and reflect the provisional stage of the drafting.

  61. 61.

    Subedi (2014, p. 736).

  62. 62.

    MIGA Convention reprinted in International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, supra note 6, p. 202, 219. http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  63. 63.

    Draft text can be found at webpage http://www1.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng987r1e.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  64. 64.

    Section IV, Article 1.1, MAI. In contrast to the OECD Draft, the Draft MAI provides for national treatment and most favoured nation standards in addition to the fair and equitable treatment . Section III, Articles 1 and 2, respectively.

  65. 65.

    MIGA Convention reprinted in International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, supra note 6, p. 219, webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  66. 66.

    For a brief discussion on MIGA, see, e.g., Subedi (2014, p. 737).

  67. 67.

    Ibid.

  68. 68.

    This is an Agreement among Governments of Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Text can be found at webpage http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Download/TreatyFile/5554 last accessed 22 May 2018.

  69. 69.

    For text of ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement of 2009, see webpage http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Download/TreatyFile/3095 last accessed 22 May 2018.

  70. 70.

    See webpage http://aei.pitt.edu/1779/1/Lome_IV_dossier.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018. Lomé IV was ratified by 12 developed European countries on the one part and 68 developing countries from Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.

  71. 71.

    The ACP was created by the Georgetown Agreement in 1975.

  72. 72.

    World Bank —Legal Framework for the Treatment of Foreign Investment (1992) 31 International Legal Materials 1366.

  73. 73.

    World Bank —Guidelines on the Treatment of Foreign Direct Investment , 7 ICSID Review, (1992) Foreign Investment Law Journal 297, 300.

  74. 74.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 119).

  75. 75.

    Rubin (1992).

  76. 76.

    NAFTA 1994, (1993) 32 International Legal Materials 639.

  77. 77.

    Prince (1993, pp. 727–728).

  78. 78.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 117).

  79. 79.

    ECT 1994, (1995) 34 International Legal Materials 381, 389.

  80. 80.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 117).

  81. 81.

    The MERCOSUR in English means the Southern Common Market. This is an economic and political agreement among some Latin American countries. The member states of MERCOSUR are Argentina , Brazil , Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela and Bolivia. The official website of MERCOSUR is available only in Spanish and Portuguese see, e.g., http://www.mercosur.int/msweb/portal%20intermediario/ last accessed 22 May 2018.

  82. 82.

    For text in Spanish, see, respectively, International Investment Instruments: A Compendium supra note 6, p. 513 webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol2_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018. An unofficial translated version of the January 1994 text can be found at webpage https://idatd.cepal.org/Normativas/MERCOSUR/Ingles/Treaty_of_Asuncion.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  83. 83.

    For text, see International Investment Instruments: A Compendium, supra note 6, p 375, webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/dtci30vol1_en.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  84. 84.

    Ibid.

  85. 85.

    The Multilateral Agreement on Investment , the main negotiating text can be found at webpage http://www1.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng987r1e.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018. From the outset of the deliberations on this draft agreement, it was agreed that the fair and equitable standard would be included in the text; see, e.g., OECD , ‘A Multilateral Agreement on Investment : Report by the Committee on International Investment and Multinational Enterprise (CIME) and the Committee on Capital Movement and Invisible Transactions (CMIT)’, Doc. OECD /GD(95) 65, (1995) webpage http://www.oecd.org/daf/mai/htm/cmitcime95.htm last accessed 22 May 2018.

  86. 86.

    MAI negotiating text at p. 56 webpage http://www1.oecd.org/daf/mai/pdf/ng/ng987r1e.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  87. 87.

    For full text of CETA see webpage http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154329.pdf last accessed 25 June 2018.

  88. 88.

    For a detailed discussion on FET provision of CETA, see Chap. 3.

  89. 89.

    European Commission ‘Investment Provisions in the EU-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CETA) ’ February 2016, webpage http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/november/tradoc_151918.pdf last accessed 25 June 2018.

  90. 90.

    See webpage http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/2003/16.html last accessed 22 May 2018.

  91. 91.

    Unofficial text can be found at webpage https://wits.worldbank.org/GPTAD/PDF/archive/NewZealand-Singapore.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  92. 92.

    See, e.g., webpage https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/FTAs-agreements-in-force/Thailand-FTA/nz-tha-icep-nationalinterestanalysis.pdf last accessed 22 May 2018.

  93. 93.

    See webpage http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Download/TreatyFile/2707 last accessed 22 May 2018.

  94. 94.

    For text of the treaty, see webpage http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Download/TreatyFile/9 last accessed 22 May 2018.

  95. 95.

    See webpage http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Download/TreatyFile/180 last accessed 22 May 2018.

  96. 96.

    Fair and Equitable Treatment : UNCTAD Series on Issues in International Investment Agreements II (UNCTAD 2012), p. 18 webpage http://unctad.org/en/Docs/unctaddiaeia2011d5_en.pdf last accessed 12 June 2018.

  97. 97.

    Subedi (2012, p. 2).

  98. 98.

    See, e.g., Coe (2002, p. 18); Khalil (1992, p. 339).

  99. 99.

    Vasciannie (1999, p. 122).

  100. 100.

    See, e.g., The Havana Charter and MIGA Treaty discussed above.

  101. 101.

    Salacuse (2010, p. 219).

  102. 102.

    Kläger (2011, p. 13).

  103. 103.

    See, e.g., Decision 24 on ‘Common Regime of Treatment of Foreign Capital and of Trademarks, Patents, Licenses and Royalties’ dated 1977 and Decision 291 on ‘Common Code for the Treatment of Foreign Capital and on Trademarks, Patents, Licenses and Royalties’ dated 1991 both adopted by the Commission of the Cartagena Agreement; for text, see respectively (1977) 16 International Legal Materials 138 and (1991) 30 International Legal Materials 1288.

  104. 104.

    See discussion above in Sect. 2.1.9 World Politics in the 1970s and its influence on Investment Treaties and the FET Standard.

  105. 105.

    See the discussion above in Sect. 2.1.17 MERCOSUR .

  106. 106.

    See, e.g., Coe (2002); Khalil (1992).

  107. 107.

    Harten (2011 (Routledge), p. 164).

  108. 108.

    Salacuse (2010, p. 219).

  109. 109.

    See, e.g., Coe (2002). Also, see, e.g., Khalil (1992), in his study Khalil examines 335 BITs from the early 1960s to the 1990s and found that only 28 did not expressly include the standard and tha

  110. 110.

    Salacuse (2010, p. 219).

  111. 111.

    Discussed in Chap.  3

  112. 112.

    Dolzer (2005, p. 89).

References

  • Aust A (2007) Modern treaty law and practice, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati JN (1978) The new international economic order. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfman MK (2006) Fair and equitable treatment: an evolving standard. In: Bogdany AV, Wolfrum R (eds) Max Planck Year Book of United Nations Law, vol 10. Koninklijke Brill N.V, The Netherlands, pp 609–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe J (2002) Fair and equitable treatment under NAFTA’s investment chapter. Am Soc Int Law Proc 96:9

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett R, Turner RK (eds) (1948) Documents on American foreign relations, vol X. Princeton University Press, Connecticut, pp 515–527

    Google Scholar 

  • Denza E, Brooks S (1987) Investment protection treaties: United Kingdom experience. Int Comp Law Q 36:908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolzer R (1981) New foundations of the law of expropriation of Alien property. Am J Int Law 75:553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolzer R (2005) Fair and equitable treatment: a key standard in investment treaties. Int Lawyer 39:87

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolzer R, Stevens (1995) Bilateral investment treaties. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudgeon KS (1986) United States bilateral investment treaties: comments on their origin, purposes, and general treatment standard. Int Tax Bus Lawyer 4:105

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart JA (1983) The new international economic order: conflict and co-operation in north-south economic relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harten GV (2011) Investment treaties as a constraining framework. In: Khan SR, Christiansen J (eds) Towards new developmentalism: market as means rather than master. Routledge, Abington, pp 154

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins HC (1951) Commercial treaties and agreements. Rinehart, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin L, Pugh RC, Schachter O, Smit H (1987) International law: cases and materials, 2nd edn. West Group, Saint Paul, Minnesota

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossain K (ed) (1980) Legal aspects of the new international economic order. Frances Pinter, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalil MI (1992) Treatment of foreign investment in bilateral investment treaties. ICSID Rev Foreign Investment Law J 8:339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kläger R (2011) Fair and equitable treatment in international investment law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Larson A (1960) Recipients’ rights under and international investment code. J Publ Law 9:172

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipstein K (1945) The place of the calvo clause in international law. Br Yearbook Int Law 22:130

    Google Scholar 

  • Nwogugu EI (1965) The legal problems of foreign investment in developing countries. Manchester University Press, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince DM (1993) An overview of the NAFTA investment chapter: substantive rules and investor-state dispute settlement. Int Lawyer 27:727

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin SJ (1956) Private foreign investment—legal and economic realities. John Hopkins Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin SJ (1992) Introductory note on “‘world bank: report to the development committee and guidelines on the treatment of foreign direct investment”. Int Legal Mater 31:1363

    Google Scholar 

  • Salacuse JW (2010) The law of investment treaties. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schill SW (2009) The multilateralization of international investment law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shan W (2008) Calvo doctrine, state sovereignty and the changing landscape of international investment law. In: Shan W, Simons P, Singh D (eds) Redefining sovereignty in international economic law. Hart Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea D (1955) The calvo clause. Minnesota University Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair AC (2004) The origins of the umbrella clause in the international law of investment protection. Arbitr Int 20:411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subedi SP (2012) International investment law: reconciling policy and principle, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Subedi SP (2014) International investment law. In: Evans MD (ed) International law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 727–751

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tudor I (2008) The fair and equitable treatment standard in the international law of foreign investment. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde KJ (1988) The bilateral investment treaty program of the United States. Cornell International Law Journal 21:201

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde KJ (1992) United States investment treaties: policy and practice. Kluwer Law and Taxation, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde KJ (1993) US bilateral investment treaties: the second wave. Mich J Int Law 14:621

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde KJ (1997–98) Sustainable liberalism and international investment regime. Mich J Int Law 19:373

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde KJ (2005) A brief history of international investment agreements. U.C. Davis J Int Law Policy 12:157

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasciannie S (1992) The Namibian foreign investments act: balancing interests in the new concessionary era. ICSID Rev Foreign Investments Law J 7:114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasciannie S (1999) The fair and equitable treatment standard in international investment law and practice. Br Yearbook Int Law 70:99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker H (1956) Treaties for the encouragement and protection of foreign investment: present United States practice. Am J Comp Law 5:229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker H (1958) Modern treaties of friendship, commerce and navigation. Minn Law Rev 42:805

    Google Scholar 

  • Weston BH (1981) The charter of economic rights and duties and deprivation of foreign owned wealth. Am J Int Law 75:437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson RR (1949) Post-war commercial treaties of the United States. Am J Int Law 43:262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson RR (1951) Property protection provisions in United States commercial treaties. Am J Int Law 45:83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson RR (1953) The international law standards in treaties of the United States. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson RR (1956) A decade of commercial treaties. Am J Int Law 50:927

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

    Rumana Islam

Authors
  1. Rumana Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Islam, R. (2018). The Historical Development of the FET Standard in International Investment Treaties. In: The Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) Standard in International Investment Arbitration. International Law and the Global South. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2125-2_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2125-2_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-2124-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-2125-2

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation