Risk Assessment and Third-Party Funding in Investment Arbitration

2021 ◽  
pp. 81-102
Author(s):  
María Beatriz Burghetto
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Party Funding

Third-party funding na arbitragem contra Estados: a relativização da imunidade executória na execução da sentença arbitral contra Estados

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-234
Author(s):  
Ana Monteiro ◽  
Daniel Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Asset Pricing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Third Party ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Current Context ◽  
Party Funding

The purpose of this article is to assess the risk for preventing the execution of arbitral awards made against Sovereign States due to the State’s immunity shield. Given the importance of an accurate asset pricing in the business of third-party funding (TPF), the topic entails a particular relevance to the current context of globalized litigation in light of its contribution to the promotion of TPF at the international arbitration community. After reviewing the literature on TPF, on the peculiarities of investment and commercial arbitrations against States and on the evolution of State immunity (also in terms of domestic legislation, considering the local laws passed by the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia), the article aims explore how the funder should incorporate into its risk assessment the risk of not executing awards rendered against Sovereign States.

Delays Expected but Duration of Delays Unpredictable: Causes, Types, and Symptoms of Procedural Applications in Investment Arbitration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Chaisse
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Common Phenomenon ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Party Funding

Abstract Delays are becoming a common phenomenon in international investment arbitration and challenging the conventional belief that it is a time-effective mode of dispute resolution. These delays, majorly stemming from interim procedural applications, are known to arise due to the different interests and types of stakeholders involved in the process. This article provides an empirical analysis of such arbitration proceedings to cull out the types, nature, and effects of delay tactics in such proceedings. This article identifies three types of applications that play an increasing role in investment arbitration, namely, applications for ‘security for costs’, applications for disclosure of third-party funding, and the objections of manifest lack of legal merit of claims. Such delays can particularly become a cause of concern for investment arbitration as they have impacts beyond those which are on the parties involved.

Excessive Costs and Recoverability of Costs Awards in Investment Arbitration

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 251-299
Author(s):  
Gabriel Bottini ◽  
Catharine Titi ◽  
Facundo Pérez Aznar ◽  
Julien Chaisse ◽  
Marko Jovanovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Party Funding ◽  
The Impact

Abstract In the era of the backlash against investor-State dispute settlement, the costs of proceedings have been a prime object of criticism. This article examines the problem of excessive costs and insufficient recoverability of costs awards. Firstly, it examines the issue of excessive costs in relation to both party costs (fees and expenses of counsel, experts, and witnesses) and tribunal costs (fees and expenses of arbitrators and arbitral institutions). Secondly, it discusses the impact of the length of proceedings on costs. Thirdly, it discusses the contribution of third-party funding to excessive costs. Finally, it analyses the issue of insufficient recoverability of costs awards and the availability of mechanisms to secure prompt payment of costs awards where there are insufficient resources or an unwillingness to pay. In examining each of these concerns, this article assesses the potential contribution of four different models for reform of investment arbitration.

19 SIAC Investment Rules

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Choong John
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Third Party Intervention ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Party Funding

In 2017, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) released separate rules for investment arbitration: the SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules (SIAC IA Rules). This chapter addresses the new SIAC IA Rules, which entered into force on 1 January 2017. It begins in Part A with an introduction to the SIAC IA Rules. Part B then examines the key provisions of the SIAC IA Rules in more detail. These include scope of application (Rule 1), constitution of the tribunal (Rules 5 to 9, 12, 13), third-party funding (Rules 24, 33 and 35), early dismissal of claims and defences (Rule 26), third party intervention (Rule 29), and confidentiality and transparency (Rules 37 and 38).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document