L’épuisement des voies de recours internes en droit international de l’investissement

The document analyzes the 'exhaustion of local remedies' (ELR) rule, which requires foreign investors to seek redress in a host state's domestic courts before initiating international arbitration. It notes that while ELR is a cornerstone of customary international law and human rights law, it has been largely bypassed in international investment law, where silence in treaties is often interpreted as a waiver. The guide details various treaty practices—including explicit requirements, time-limited exercises of remedies, and express waivers—and reviews jurisprudence on whether ELR is a jurisdictional or procedural requirement. It concludes by providing policy recommendations for states wishing to reintroduce ELR to protect national sovereignty and strengthen domestic legal systems.

• In international investment law, tribunals generally interpret the silence of a treaty regarding the exhaustion of local remedies (ELR) as an implicit waiver of the rule, reversing the presumption of customary international law.
• The ICSID Convention's Article 26 is widely viewed as an express waiver of the ELR rule, meaning investors do not need to exhaust domestic procedures before starting ICSID arbitration unless the state explicitly stipulates otherwise in the investment instrument.
• There is a split in jurisprudence over whether ELR is a jurisdictional condition (affecting the tribunal's power to hear a case) or a procedural condition of admissibility (affecting whether a claim is appropriate for judicial treatment).
• Tribunals often apply exceptions to the ELR rule based on customary international law, such as when domestic remedies are 'manifestly futile' or offer no reasonable prospect of effective reparation.
• ELR is frequently treated as a substantive requirement for claims of 'denial of justice,' meaning a claim cannot succeed unless the investor has first sought a final decision from the host state's highest court.
• Recent treaty models, such as those from the SADC (2012) and India (2015), have reintroduced mandatory ELR requirements to strengthen the jurisdictional power of domestic legal systems.
• The Indian Model BIT (2015) includes a particularly stringent ELR requirement, mandating that domestic remedies be exhausted for a minimum period of five years from the date the investor became aware of the measure.

APA

Brauch, M. D. (2017). L’épuisement des voies de recours internes en droit international de l’investissement. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best-practices-exhaustion-local-remedies-law-investment-fr.pdf

Chicago

Brauch, Martin Dietrich. L’épuisement des voies de recours internes en droit international de l’investissement. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2017. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best-practices-exhaustion-local-remedies-law-investment-fr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Brauch |first1=Martin Dietrich |title=L’épuisement des voies de recours internes en droit international de l’investissement |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=January 2017 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best-practices-exhaustion-local-remedies-law-investment-fr.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{brauch2017lpuisement, author = {Brauch, Martin Dietrich}, title = {{L’épuisement des voies de recours internes en droit international de l’investissement}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2017}, month = jan, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best-practices-exhaustion-local-remedies-law-investment-fr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }