Investor-state tribunals and constitutional courts: The Mexican sweeteners saga

Article English OPEN
Puig, Sergio;
(2013)
  • Publisher: Elsevier BV
  • Journal: Mexican Law Review,volume 5,issue 2,pages199-243 (issn: 1870-0578)
  • Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1016/s1870-0578(16)30024-5
  • Subject: derecho internacional privado | Law | sweeteners | derecho internacional | endulcorantes | Suprema Corte de Justicia de México | Arbitraje inversionista-Estado | Investor-state arbitration | private international law | international law | conflict of laws and Mexican Constitutional Court

This article tackles the complex question of the relationship between international and domestic adjudicatory bodies. It does so by analyzing the debate between liberals and developmentalists over the effects of investor-state arbitration tribunals on domestic courts. F... View more
  • References (52)
    52 references, page 1 of 6

    1. The Debate: Liberals vs. Developmentalists .............................. 1. Background of NAFTA's Sweeteners Conflict ........................... 2. The Proceedings Against the Decree .........................................

    A. Proceedings before the Mexican Supreme Court................. 228

    B. Polity and International Adjudicatory Bodies....................... 238 11 Ginsburg, International Substitutes for Domestic Institutions, 25 i lioanter r eviw fo l wa

    & e conMics 107, 107-123 (2005). 12 Bernardo Sepulveda Amor, International Law and National Sovereignty: The NAFTA and the

    Claims of Mexican Jurisdiction, 19 h ous . J. i nt 'l l. 5 65, 581 (1997). Judge Sepulveda concluded

    NAFTA -including, of course, those in Chapter 11 […] The primacy of domestic laws and

    national courts is one of the necessary expressions of sovereignty.” 13 See Héctor Fix-Fierro & Sergio López-Ayllón, The Impact Of Globalization on the Reform of

    the State and the Law in Latin America, 19 h ous . J. i nt 'l l. 785 ta 797 (1997) concluding that:

    portant matters, and this means a relative loss of power for them as national institutions.” 14 Cfr. W. S. Dodge, Loewen v. United States: Trials and Errors under NAFTA Chapter Eleven, 52 d e -

    Pula l. r ev . (2002) 563 (arguing that review by international tribunals is not an effective way

  • Similar Research Results (2)
  • Metrics
Share - Bookmark