Salini test: history and trends of law enforcement practice

The subject of this article is the international law enforcement practice developing in relation to the concept of investment. The formation of this practice takes place in numerous decisions of investment arbitration. The Salini test plays an important role in this practice, which is an investment arbitration decision that has become the flagship of the development of the practice of applying international investment law and its principles.

The purpose of the article is to identify trends in the decisions of investment arbitration, in which the concept of investment is interpreted, as well as in the doctrinal justification of approaches to this problem.

The methodology of the study is a comparative legal analysis of those concepts that are the basis of the Salini test, as well as competing theories with it.

Main results. The reason for the appearance of the Salini test was the impossibility of a total consensus of states regarding the legal formalization of the concept of "investment". This impossibility has an objective character, since the investments of resources in one or another sphere have such significant differences that they cannot be taken into account within the framework of a single legal paradigm. In addition, the subjective factor is also important for the formulation of this concept, since states endowed with different roles – either as recipients of investments or as investors have divergent interests that cannot be realized within the framework of a single legal approach.

Conclusions. Investment arbitration has to a certain extent demonstrated the ability to overcome the differences that exist between different states regarding the key concept of investment law. It was in the arbitration decisions, and above all in the Salini test, that the signs of the key concept of investment law were identified, which together constitute its content. The content of the Salini test is that the concept of investment is formulated based on the identification of the following criteria: (1) investment of assets; (2) a certain duration of the investment of assets; (3) risky nature of investments; (4) significant economic importance for the recipient state.

In addition, the author of the article comes to the conclusion that, despite the fact that the Salini test accumulated the main legal ideas about the regulation of investment activity, the amorphous nature of the concept of investment determines a high degree of its uncertainty in relation to specific situations. This provokes a continuation of the discussion regarding legally significant investment criteria.

1. Babkina E., Trakhalina L. Some Issues of Qualifying the Notion of Investment: Criticism of the Salini Test. Zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava i mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenii = Journal of International Law and International Relations, 2017, no. 3–4, pp. 3–9. (In Russ.).

2. Dolzer R., Kriebaum U., Schreuer C. Principles of International Investment Law, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, 2022. 560 р.

3. Gaillard E. Identify of Define? Reflections on the Evolution of the Concept of Investment in ICSID Practice, in: Binder C., Kriebaum U., Reinisch A., Wittich S. (eds.). International Investment Law for the 21st Century, Essays in Honour of Christoph Schreuer, Oxford, Oxford Academic Publ., 2009, pp. 403–416. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571345.003.0022.

4. García-Bolívar O.E. Economic development at the core of the international investment regime, in: Brown C., Miles K. (eds.). Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration, Cambridge, 2011, pp. 586–605.

5. Grabowski A. The Definition of Investment under the ICSID Convention: a Defense of Salini. Chicago Journal of International Law, 2014, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 287–309.

6. Schreuer Ch., Malintoppi L., Reinish A., Sinclair A. The ICSID Convention, A Commentary, 2nd ed. Cambridge, 2009. 1596 p.

7. Schill S., Malintoppi L., Reinisch A., Schreuer C., Sinclair A. (eds.). Schreuer's Commentary on the ICSID Convention, A Commentary on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, 3rd ed. Cambridge, 2022. CXC + 2026 p. DOI: 10.1017/9781316516584.

8. Mortenson J.D. The Meaning of «Investment»: ICSID’s Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law. Harvard International Law Journal, 2010, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 257–318.

9. Schreuer C. Commentary on the ICSID Convention, ICSID Review. Foreign Investment Law Journal, 1996, vol. 11, iss. 2, pp. 318–492. DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/11.2.318.

10. Schreuer С. Decisions Ex Aequo et Bono Under the ICSID Convention. ICSID Review Foreign Investment Law Journal, 1996, vol. 11, iss. 1, pp. 37–63. DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/11.1.37.

11. Schreuer C. The ICSID Convention, A Commentary. Cambridge, 2001. 1466 p.

12. Anurov V.N. Competence of the arbitration court, in 3 volumes. Moscow, 2022. Vol. 2: Investment disputes. 352 p. (In Russ.).

13. Anurov V.N. Definition "investment". Treteiskii sud = Arbitration, 2016, no. 2–3, pp. 125–141. (In Russ.).

14. Anurov V.N. International investment Arbitration: issues of competence. Moscow, 2019. 208 p. DOI: 10.31085/9785392305483-2019-208. (In Russ.).

15. Popov E.V. Resolution of international investment disputes. Moscow, 2018. 305 p. (In Russ.).

16. Rachkov I. Setting aside international investment arbitration awards by state courts at the seat of arbitration (inspired by the Yukos saga): show must go on?. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie = International Justice, 2020, no. 1, pp. 107–124. (In Russ.).

17. Lauterpacht E. Christoph Schreuer: An Appreciation, in: Binder C., Kriebaum U., Reinisch A., Wittich S. (eds.). International Investment Law for the 21st Century, Essays in Honour of Christoph Schreuer, Oxford, Oxford Academic Publ., 2009, p. 3. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571345.003.0001.

18. Voznesenskaya N.N. Foreign investments: Russia and world experience. Moscow, 2002. 220 p. (In Russ.).

19. Vel’yaminov G.M. International economic law and process. Moscow, 2004. 496 p. (In Russ.).

20. Viktorova N.N. The problems concerning the interpretation of the term "investment" in private international law. Vestnik Universiteta imeni O.E. Kutafina (MGYuA) = Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL), 2016, no. 12, pp. 33–43. (In Russ.).

21. Carreau D., Juillard P. International Economic law. Moscow, 2002. 583 p. (In Russ.).

22. Farkhutdinov I.Z. International investment law and process. Moscow, 2015. 416 p.

23. Doronina N.G., Semilyutina N.G. International private law and investments. Moscow, 2012. 272 p. (In Russ.).

24. Vadi V. Cultural Heritage in International Investment Law and Arbitration. Cambridge, 2014. 344 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO978113982598.

25. Douglas Z. The Enforcement of Environmental Norms in Investment Treaty Arbitration, in: Dupuy P.-M., Viñuales J.E. (eds.). Harnessing Foreign Investment to Promote Environmental Protection: Incentives and Safeguards, Cambridge, 2013, pp. 415–444. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139344289.019.

26. Sornarajah M. The international law on foreign investment, 2nd ed. Cambridge, 2004. 525 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511617027.

27. Subedi S. International Investment Law: Reconciling Policy and Principle. Oxford, Portland, 2008. 244 p.

28. Mbengue М., Florou G. Evolutionary Interpretation in Investment Arbitration: About a Judicial Taboo, in: Abi-Saab G., Keith K., Marceau G., Marquet C. (eds.). Evolutionary Interpretation and International Law, Hart, 2019, pp. 253–266.

29. García-Bolívar О.Е. The surge of investment disputes: Latin America testing the international law of foreign investments, in: The Second Biennial General Conference Of the Asian Society of International Law, Tokyo, Japan, August 1-2, 2009, available at: http://asiansil-jp.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/garcia-bolivar.pdf (accessed: May 30, 2023).

30. Burova E. Investment Arbitration as a Two-Line Highway: Counterclaims by States against Investors in Light of the Recent Arbitral Practice and New Generation Investment Treaties, in: Asoskov A.V., Zhiltsov А.N., Khodykin R.M. (eds.). Novye gorizonty mezhdunarodnogo arbitrazha, Collection of Articles, iss. 6, Moscow, Russian Institute of Modern Arbitration publ., 2020, pp. 344–379. (In Russ.).

31. Grebelskiy A.V. End of an Epoch? The Fate of Investment Arbitration in Light of Attempts to Establish the System of an Investment Court of the EU, in: Muranov A.I. (ed. & comp.). V.A. Kabatov, S.N. Lebedev: In Memoriam, Recollections, Articles, Other Materials, 2nd ed., Moscow, Statut Publ., 2017, pp. 476–502. (In Russ.).

32. Simma B. Foreign Investment Arbitration: A Place for Human Rights?. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2011, vol. 60, iss. 3, pp. 573–596. DOI: 10.1017/SOO20589311000224.

33. History of the ICSID Convention: Documents concerning the Origin and Formulation of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Citizens of Other States, in 4 vol. Washington, DC, ICSID Publ., 2009. Vol. 2, pt. 1. 645 p.

34. Beloglavek A.I. International legal protection of investments in the electric power industry. Kyiv, 2011. 396 p. (In Russ.).

35. Wordsworth S., Investment Arbitration: Mass Claims. World Arbitration and Mediation Review, 2014, no. 8, pp. 328–340.

36. Cole T., Vaksha A. Power-Conferring Treaties: The Meaning of ‘Investment’ in the ICSID Convention. Leiden Journal of International Law, 2011, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 305–330.

37. Sattorova M. Defining Investment Under the ICSID Convention and BITs: Of Ordinary Meaning, Telos, and Beyond. Asian Journal of International Law, 2012, no. 2, pp. 267–290. DOI: 10.1017/S2044251312000112.