La protection des attentes légitimes de l’investisseur dans l’arbitrage international
Julien Cazala
Le contentieux arbitral international relatif aux investissements consacre
dans les sentences les plus récentes une place considérable à la protection des
attentes légitimes de l’investisseur. La présentation par les arbitres de ces attentes,
de leurs relations avec les apparences, les représentations, les croyances légitimes,
etc., et pour tout dire le fondement du caractère obligatoire de la protection de
celles-ci est très peu développé dans les sentences. Il est plus fait appel à un sentiment ou à un idéal d’équité qu’à une véritable construction juridique. C’est sans
doute ce qui rend si particulièrement perméable aux circonstances particulières de
chaque espèce le traitement de ces attentes légitimes. C’est à partir d’une trentaine
de sentences arbitrales rendues depuis une dizaine d’années que nous présentons
ce standard en plein essor et essayons d’analyser son fondement et sa pertinence –
parfois discutable – ainsi que les conséquences que cette reconnaissance entraîne
pour les investisseurs et pour les États.Mots-clés :
droit international des investissements, traitement juste et équitable, attentes légitimes, estoppel, CIRDI.
Protection of an investor’s legitimate expectations is widely invoked before the
international arbitration tribunals established to settle investments disputes. Based
on the study of more than thirty recent arbitral awards, mostly rendered by ICSID
tribunals (International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes) we present
an analysis of how this standard may be understood.
Not all expectations of investors are legitimate, and some may not be protected by
international investment law, since the notion of risk characterizes most investment
operations. In light of the recent awards mentioned, the standard specifically imposes
the obligation not to act arbitrarily, in a manner that is grossly unfair and unjust, or
that will be harmful to the investor. This international standard also requires transparency, particularly in administrative proceedings, as well as compliance with the
representations made and reasonably relied upon by the investor. Acts committed in
bad faith need to be sanctioned. The consequences of the standard are well known
today. However, although this notion is one of the most pervasive in recent arbitral
practice, Members of arbitral tribunals almost never explain its origin. It is quite
surprising to see that still today it is quite uncommon for tribunals to set forth the
grounds for why this quickly developing, mandatory standard has to be respected by
host States. Arbitrators agree on that the principle of fair and equitable treatment
may constitute the basis of the standard, but although it is generally accepted its
contours are far from being precise.
In some instances, reference to the standard of protection of legitimate expectations of foreign investors seems to be irrelevant. This is the case in particular, when
arbitrators consider that the host State violated the standard of protection of legitimate expectations by way of breach of a contract to which the investor is a party.
However, the obligation to respect the terms of the contract ought to be self-sufficient.
While references to the protection of legitimate expectations are questionable under
such circumstances, it is all the more necessary to specify standard carefully in cases,
where there is no promise or commitment of the State in favor of the investor.Keywords :
international investment law, fair and equitable treatment, legitimate expectations, estoppel, ICSID.
• 1 INTRODUCTION
• 2 FAITS ET ACTES GÉNÉRATEURS DES ATTENTES
— 2.1 Auteur du fait ou de l’acte générateur des attentes légitimes
— 2.2 Nature juridique du fait ou de l’acte générateur
des attentes légitimes
• 3 CONTENU DES ATTENTES LÉGITIMES
— 3.1 Objet des attentes légitimes
— 3.2 Caractère légitime des attentes
• 4 CONCLUSION