The Iran–United States Claims Tribunal: Revisiting Indirect Expropriation in International Investment Law

Indirect expropriation remains a contentious and challenging issue in both theory and practice. From the late 20th century into the 21st, the central conflict in international investment law lies between sovereignty and the protection of private property. The deepening of economic and trade globalization has given rise to a renewed form of “Calvoism,” placing foreign investors’ interests in host states under increasingly complex circumstances. The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal was the first case to spur international research on indirect expropriation. The debate over whether losses to foreign investors should be borne by governments or private parties established an efficient paradigm for resolution and offers instructive insights on attributing responsibility. However, the paradigm for addressing indirect expropriation remains largely monolithic. In the current era of faltering globalization, indirect expropriation requires fresh reassessment.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Economics Law and Policy
Published
2025-07-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22158/elp.v8n2p125
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Iran–United States Claims Tribunal: Revisiting Indirect Expropriation in International Investment Law

Yu Huang, Yanhui Han
2 links
Economics Law and Policy
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

The Iran–United States Claims Tribunal: Revisiting Indirect Expropriation in International Investment Law

Yu Huang, Yanhui Han
article en

Abstract

Indirect expropriation remains a contentious and challenging issue in both theory and practice. From the late 20th century into the 21st, the central conflict in international investment law lies between sovereignty and the protection of private property. The deepening of economic and trade globalization has given rise to a renewed form of “Calvoism,” placing foreign investors’ interests in host states under increasingly complex circumstances. The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal was the first case to spur international research on indirect expropriation. The debate over whether losses to foreign investors should be borne by governments or private parties established an efficient paradigm for resolution and offers instructive insights on attributing responsibility. However, the paradigm for addressing indirect expropriation remains largely monolithic. In the current era of faltering globalization, indirect expropriation requires fresh reassessment.

Economics Law and PolicyVol. 8(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Iran–United States Claims Tribunal: Revisiting Indirect Expropriation in International Investment Law — Yu Huang, Yanhui Han · Economics Law and Policy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS