This book is the first book-length analysis of investor accountability under general and customary international law, international human rights law, international environmental law, international humanitarian law, as well as international investment law. International investment law is currently facing growing criticisms for its failure to address corruption, abuse, environmental damage, and other forms of investor misconduct. Reform initiatives range from the rejection of international law as a governing regime for investors, to the dramatic overhaul of investment treaties that supposedly enable investor overprotection, to the creation of a multilateral international instrument that would enable the litigation of claims against errant businesses before an international tribunal. Whether these initiatives succeed in disciplining investors remains to be seen. What these initiatives undeniably show however, is that change is warranted to counteract this lopsided investors' international law. Each chapter in the book addresses a different and underexplored dimension of investor accountability, thus offering a novel and consolidated study of international law. The book will be of immense assistance to legal practitioners, academics and policy makers involved in the design, drafting, application and reform of various international instruments addressing investor accountability.

This is a topical area for the courts, which have moved to imply various limitations or tests on decision makers powers and when they can be challenged. This is made more difficult for lay users and lawyers alike in that implied restrictions are (by definition) not apparent from the words of the relevant contract itself. These limits are applied by the courts not just to fiduciaries (such as trustees or directors), but also to non-fiduciaries (eg banks and employers). Recent case law includes: * Pitt v Holt (SC) - trustee decisions (2013) * Braganza (SC) - contractual discretions (2015) * Eclairs (SC) - directors powers: proper purposes (2015) * IBM UK Holdings v Dalgleish (CA) - employer powers under pension plans (2017) * British Airways (CA)- pension plan - proper purposes (2018) The book reviews the relevant doctrines of: * Interpretation rules * Proper purposes; * Due consideration of relevant factors * Full perversity (no reasonable decision maker)

State pensions are the largest item in the UK social security budget, costing GBP96.7 billion in 2017/18. In the same year, 45.6 million people were members of UK occupational pension schemes (out of a total population of 66.4 million) and the total amount saved into workplace schemes in 2018 was GBP90.4 billion. A consequence of the pensions sector's large size has been that pensions law and social security law have become increasingly specialised areas of practice. Yet despite their social and economic importance and the fascinating legal issues they generate, pensions have not been the subject of sustained academic attention. This book starts to fill this gap by initiating a dialogue between practitioners and scholars working on pensions law and policy, groups who have much to learn from one another.