Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in Investor-State and WTO Dispute Settlement. Comparing Consent and Inconsistency in the Application of Other International Law (completed)

The research project provides a comparative analysis of the WTO and investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms approach to jurisdiction and applicable law issues.

Image of the globe and boxes

Illustration photo: Colourbox.com

About the project

Once consent to jurisdiction has been given to a dispute settlement mechanism, to what extent does that dispute settlement mechanism continue to interpret the consent in line with what the parties intended?

This question develops particular pertinence as the issues before the dispute settlement mechanisms become increasingly complex and the dispute settlement mechanisms mature and develop their practices over time.

The project aims to consider this question in relation to the practice of the World Trade Organization (WTO) panels and Appellate Body and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) bodies.

The project focuses on the scope of jurisdiction and applicable law of these bodies over questions of 'other public international law’, which raise particular concern in today’s growing number of complex and inter-connected disputes. 


The project seeks to answer the following research questions:

1. How should adjudicators of the WTO and investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms approach their jurisdictional authority when applying other international law?

2. To what extent does the design of the dispute settlement mechanism matter in relation to the application of "other international law"?


This project is supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 223274 - PluriCourts Centre) and the FRIPRO Young Research Talents (project number 274946 - State Consent to International Jurisdiction, Prof. dr. Freya Baetens).

Published Jan. 30, 2020 2:26 PM - Last modified Aug. 19, 2022 11:33 AM