Measures taken by governments during armed conflict to safeguard their essential interests sometimes cause damages to Foreign Investors. The Investors thus affected seek remedies in the arbitration tribunals invoking breach of host government obligations to protect investments. The host government also usually attempts to assert as defense non-precluded measures to prove its irresponsibility, or if it proves responsible, justify it by resorting to circumstances precluding wrongfulness in the customary international law. But since different courts do not consider the same requirements to invoke these rules, there is no certainty that the parties to the lawsuit will be able to invoke them and, as a result, the scope of government's obligations to protect the Foreign Investor during the armed conflict is obscure. To clarify the scope of the host government's obligations to protect the Foreign Investor during armed conflicts and balance the interests of the Investor and the host government during the investment disputes arising from the armed conflict, this article explores the possibility and requirements of invoking circumstances precluding wrongfulness and non-precluded measures and the relationship between them.

In Iran’, s Foreign investment law the term of “, Foreign Investor”,included real and judicial persons such as Iranian companies controlled by Foreign shareholders. On the other hand, possibility of claim against Iran by “, Foreign Investors”,in international forum including ICSID, in case of Iran accession to Washington convention, has been recognized. It raises the question of impact of dual nationality of individuals and nationality of Iranian companies as a Foreign Investor on ICSID jurisdiction. This paper seeks to find the answer to the question by analyzing awards issued by ICSID. The analysis shows that jurisdiction of ICSID cannot be established mere reliance on the dual nationality by respondent and Foreign control by claimant. Instead the process of establishment of the jurisdiction is subject to subtle legal considerations.

Investment arbitration usually has its legal basis in the bilateral investment treaty (BIT), regional or multilateral treaties or in an investment contract. Some treaties cover only disputes relating to obligations under these kinds of agreements, i. e. only for claims of treaty violations. Some others create an international law obligation, according to which the host state shall observe any binding obligation with respect to investments. These and other similar provisions are commonly called “ umbrella clause” . Although other formulations have also been used, Clauses of this kind have been put into treaties to provide additional protection to Investor and are directed for covering investment agreements that host countries frequently conclude with Foreign Investors. In most of the investment treaties, the umbrella clauses are not always with the same wording, so arbitral tribunals have given different interpretations and reached conflicting conclusions. This study gives an overview of the origin and significance of the wording of this Clause in BITs, then looks at the effect, scope, and conditions of application of the Clause as interpreted by ICSID arbitral tribunals and tries to analyze ICSID arbitral jurisprudence on the basis of restrictive or extensive interpretation of the Clause.

According to experts, the main cause of Investment’s developing behavioral problems in the capital and the stock markets is mental disorders by Investors. For this reason, the study of behavioral and psychological issues for Investors has been noticeably important nowadays. Investor’s behavior in the stock market, decision making, and allocation of financial resources, pricing and evaluating corporate performance are influenced by this so that the main reason of behave uncertainty is a lack of knowledge and also the factor of risk. Furthermore, behavioral finance experts have known the knowledge of human behavior by the behavioral signs, false confidence, limited vision, projection error and avoiding the regret and remorse. Assessing the knowledge of Investors, risk perception and their behavior can be the key to many issues, hence, in this study we have tried to get influence by the relationship between knowledge and risk perception on the behavior of Investors in the stock market for trading in Tehran stock markets. We have provided a test of the relationship between the numbers of Investor awareness and it has been evaluated. Then, by using the appropriate test statistics and reviewing the data normalization, it is complied with the assumptions of the researcher hypothesis.

Foreign investment issue and compensation in that field constitutes one of the most important matters in contemporary International Law. When an investment relation between a host State and Foreign Investors is formed, the parties to terminate the relations are committed to comply with the obligations they accepted. However at times, when there is an expropriation of assets of Foreign Investors, their proprietary rights are affected and even violated and thus incur material or moral damages to the other party where the defaulting party is obliged to compensate them. Damages of the moral as well as material aspects are reparable. The aim of the present study is to examine the issue of calculating the amount of compensation in International Law and some arbitral awards and to identify the criteria governing them.