This article examines the admissibility of applying the most-favoured-nation clause to jurisdictional provisions of international investment agreements and identifies interpretative criteria for delineating the scope of States’ consent to arbitration. The focus is placed on the relationship between substantive standards of investment protection and procedural mechanisms for the settlement of investment disputes, including access to international arbitration and admissibility requirements. The article outlines the principal approaches developed in arbitral practice regarding the “importation” of procedural advantages through an MFN clause and summarises legal arguments supporting a heightened need for certainty in matters of arbitral jurisdiction. It argues that extending MFN treatment to procedural provisions requires a clear and unequivocal expression of the contracting States’ intention and that generally recognised rules of treaty interpretation should be applied to ensure predictability and consistency in decision-making.
Dmitry Semenovich Belkin (Thu,) studied this question.