The Analysis Of Case Tenaris S.A.and Talta V.Venezuela

With the acceleration of economic globalization and liberalization,international investment has developed rapidly.In the process of international investment,investment countries sometimes take collection measures to protect their state interests.In order to avoid arbitrariness and ensure justice and equity in the expropriation,countries tend to prescribe expropriation by Bilateral Investment Treaties.Also in this way can they protect the legitimate interests of their investors.whereas with the strengthen of the prevention of expropriation,some more hidden and destructive indirect expropriation become increasingly common.Countries' judging standards of indirect expropriation varies because their different stands of points.This has multiplied the difficulties of the practice of identifying indirect expropriation.As a result,the identification and prevention of indirect expropriation has become a significant direction of the international economic law.Based on the Tenaris S.A.and Talta v.Venezuela case,through analysis on the dispute and the ICSID judgment of this case,this paper mainly studies how to identify and prevent indirect expropriation.Combined with the status quo of bilateral investment in China and the relevant international practice,this paper also discussed the measures toward dealing with the risk of indirect expropriation of our country in international investment.This paper is composed of four parts.The first part introduces the fact of the case.It mainly introduces the background and the development of the case Tenaris S.A.and Talta v.Venezuela.The second part presents the dispute of the case and its legal analysis.This part makes legal analysis on the dispute of the case and relating bilateral investment provisions and Venezuelan domestic laws and regulations by judging whether the Tenaris SA and Talta belong to the bilateral agreement,whether the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction,whether the Venezuelan government has implemented indirect expropriation and the arbitral tribunal's investigation on the fact.The third part is a comment on the case.By analyzing the facts of the case,combining the relevant evidence,laws and regulations,this part outspreads comments on the rationality of the arbitration results and set forth the identification of indirect expropriation of ICSID.The fourth part mainly discusses what inspiration can this case leave on China.This part analyzes our deficiency of identifying standard and improving methods by introducing thecurrent identifying standard on indirect expropriation and its theoretical basis in China combined with the experience of this case.Meanwhile,this part discusses how our government and investors should prevent indirect expropriation after absorbing the experience and lessons learned through commenting this case.