Fair and Equitable Treatment and the Fabric of General Principles is the latest in a number of recent monographs devoted to the ‘fair and equitable treatment’ (FET) standard, which testifies to the fact that FET continues to be one of the preferred topics of inquiry for investment law scholars, in addition to being undoubtedly the ‘core’ substantive standard of protection invoked by investors in contemporary arbitral practice. Fulvio Maria Palombino's book builds on the existing scholarly research (see in particular the important studies by Martins Paparinskis, Roland Kläger, Patrick Dumberry, Todd Weiler and Alexandra Diehl) and provides an original contribution to the topic.

The book is organized in six main chapters, in addition to the conclusive remarks. Chapter 1 introduces the reader to the topic by inquiring into the origins of the obligation to treat investors fairly and equitably. The author views FET as an example of ‘normative equity’, ie that type of equity which ‘affects the substantive content of the law going so far as to be subsumed under specific treaty provisions’. (2) Chapter 2 delves further into the normative basis of FET. The author traverses the main scholarly opinions on the origins and content of FET and considers that none of them adequately captures the essence of the standard. Palombino for his part argues that FET has penetrated into what he refers to as the ‘fabric’ of general international law, through general principles peculiar to a certain field of international law. Those principles have, in the author's view, their foundation in the international legal order itself, but are shaped, through judicial application, according to the specific features of a given field of international law. The author contends that ‘by way of a constant and uniform case law’, which has defined the main components of the standard, FET has become the Grundnorm of international investment law (52).

The central part of the book, comprised of three chapters (3–5), is devoted to what in the author's opinion are the three main principles of FET, namely due process, legitimate expectations and proportionality. Starting with due process (Chapter 3), the author accurately engages with both doctrinal sources and case law. Palombino argues that due process is a general principle of international law which, as far as FET is concerned, has a twofold component: denial of justice and procedural fairness in administrative proceedings. With those two facets of the standard in mind, the book provides a useful systematization of the relevant investment case law.

Chapter 4 on legitimate expectations is particularly interesting and rich in original ideas. Adopting the by now usual catalogue of situations giving rise to legitimate expectations, Palombino first reviews expectations arising out of contractual commitments, then moves to expectations linked to a promise or representation of the administration, and finally addresses the controversial topic of alleged expectations created by general regulation or legislation. In particular the section on promises provides a convincing analysis of the issues that arise when the administration makes an assurance or representation to an investor. Against the backdrop of the examination of unilateral acts under public international law, Palombino's analysis sheds new light on what ought to be the proper scope of protection under the legitimate expectations doctrine in case of governmental promises, clarifying a number of points which have received insufficient attention by arbitral tribunals thus far.

Chapter 5 addresses the principle of proportionality, whose contours are reviewed by looking at its application in both domestic and international courts, before delving into the examination of the investment arbitration cases. In addressing proportionality, it could have been interesting for the author to consider a number of additional questions which tribunals routinely face when adjudicating claims by foreign investors, such as the type of deference owed by arbitral tribunals to the primary decisions-makers and the related question of the standard of review.

The final substantive chapter (6) is devoted to the ‘driving role’ of case law in shaping the contours of FET. The author tackles with accuracy and rigour important questions such as arbitral ‘precedent’, the striving for consistency in the interpretation of legal issues and the need for predictability of solutions. Palombino's analysis on these matters is not only relevant for the specific topic addressed in the book. Beyond FET, it will provide a useful theoretical framework for the broader debate on the alleged lack of consistency in case law, which is one of the main concerns with the current investor–State dispute settlement system.

Fair and Equitable Treatment and the Fabric of General Principles is an original and well-researched book, in which the author challenges a number of conventional wisdoms on FET. Regardless of whether one agrees with the author on all of his conclusions, his arguments are cogently put forward. Among the strengths of the book one can mention the solid discussion of public international law principles relevant to FET and the interesting incursions into domestic law legal systems which play an important role in the understanding of FET components such as due process, legitimate expectations or proportionality. In respect of the domestic law analysis, it would have further enhanced the book if the examination had reached beyond the most well-known jurisdictions to continents, such as Africa, Asia or Latin America, which remain largely unexplored by the author. The careful balance between theory and practice is also to be commended. Doctrinal discussions seamlessly blend with an always rigorous dissection of the cases, an aspect which will make the book a valuable resource for scholars and practitioners alike. With regard to the analysis of the case law, Palombino endeavours to read beyond what arbitrators say they are doing, with a view to ascertaining what they are actually doing, and thus uncovers the (often tacit) rationale(s) behind arbitral decisions.