Abstract

This article suggests that the arbitral use of jus cogens and erga omnes is slowly producing a ‘presumption of applicability’ in investor–state arbitration tribunals tasked with determining whether international law applies to investors. Looking backward from two recent counterclaims at tribunals established under investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in international investment agreements that support our claim, the article first analyses the evolution and use of jus cogens in attaching rights-claims to non-State subjects of international law. Secondly, it explores the origins and uses of obligations erga omnes in attaching obligations-claims to non-State subjects of international law. It attempts to define the contours of jus cogens and erga omnes as they are deployed in recent ISDS case law and highlights the limits of each concept. The article concludes that there is a potential for a presumption of applicability in international investment arbitration for investor obligations and that this presumption can be sourced from general international law.

中文翻译：

---

从牵引到受条约约束：国际投资仲裁中的强制法、普遍适用和公司主体性

摘要

本文表明，在负责确定国际法是否适用于投资者的投资者-国家仲裁法庭中，强制法和普遍适用法的仲裁使用正在慢慢产生“适用性推定”。从最近针对支持我们主张的国际投资协议中投资者-国家争端解决（ISDS）条款设立的法庭的两项反诉回顾，本文首先分析了强制法在将权利主张附加到非国家主体的演变和使用国际法。其次，探讨了普遍义务的起源和用途。在对国际法的非国家主体附加义务要求时。它试图定义在最近的 ISDS 判例法中部署的强行法和普遍适用法的轮廓，并强调每个概念的局限性。文章的结论是，在国际投资仲裁中可能会推定投资者义务的适用性，并且该推定可以源自一般国际法。