Yves NOUVEL - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Geneviève BASTID-BURDEAU - Professor (université Panthéon-Sorbonne)
Yann KERBRAT - Professor (université Aix Marseille)
Charles LEBEN - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Carlo SANTULLI - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Pierre TERCIER - Professor (université de Fribourg - Suisse)
The settlement of international disputes is classically studied thought the concepts of judicial power, jurisdiction and admissibility. However it is now common to find references to the notion of « right of action » or « right of claim » in decisions of international tribunals especially when individuals are involved. One might wonder whether this observation reveals an evolution in the concepts governing disputes settlement in international law. The study of the right of action in international investment law demonstrates the usefulness of the concept in explaining the applicable rules. First, as a key concept, it can be used to identify the rules that determine the possibility to obtain a decision of the tribunal as opposed to the rules governing the State's responsibility. In practice, it appears that the tribunals do not always respect this distinction. Secondly, the right of action allows taking into account the legal consequences of the State's consent to arbitration. In this case, the concept of judicial power is partly irrelevant as it is usually based on a consent agreement between the parties. It follows that the concept of right of action is relevant when the applicable rules deal with the possibility to invoke and to rely on the consent to jurisdiction expressed by the respondent State. The fact that it is the case in the settlement of disputes between a State and an investor does not mean that it can not be so in the context of a interstate dispute.