Interpretation Of Investment Agreements

The misaspoure of the general rule of contract interpretation was also strongly criticised by Jan Paulsson in his dissenting opinion in Hrvatska Elektroprivreda d.d. v. Slovenia, in which Paulsson complained that the Tribunal relied on a “commercial logic” in disregard of the general rule of treaty interpretation: the distinction between treaty interpretations and treaty amendments can be extremely difficult, as shown by the Interpretation of Article 1105 of THE NAFTA by the Free Trade Commission (Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter XI Commissions, 31 July 2001. For harsh criticism, see Second Opinion Jennings in Methanex v. United States, UNCITRAL, 6 September 2001). The correct application of the general rule of contract interpretation is not theoretical and practical.