Quasar de Valors SICAV SA, Orgor de Valores SICAV SA, GBI 9000 SICAV SA and Alos 34 SL v. Russian Federation

ICSID Reports ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 205-224
Keyword(s):  
Stock Price ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Tax Levies ◽  
Depository Receipts ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Party Funding

205Jurisdiction — Dispute — Expropriation — Whether jurisdiction under the BIT was limited to the determination of the amount or method of payment of the compensation due for expropriation — Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to determine that an expropriation had occurred — Whether there was a dispute between the parties concerning the existence of an expropriation — Whether the claimants had to resort to diplomatic protection or municipal courts to establish that an expropriation had occurredMost-favoured-nation treatment — Dispute — Interpretation — Whether investors could invoke the broader dispute resolution clauses of other BITs by virtue of most-favoured-nation treatment — Whether access to international arbitration fell within the scope of most-favoured-nation treatmentInterpretation — Intention — Evidence — Object and purpose — VCLT, Article 31 — Whether there was evidence that the parties to the BIT intended to exclude the determination of expropriation from jurisdiction — Whether the object and purpose of the BIT would be frustrated by excluding from jurisdiction the determination of expropriationJurisdiction — Foreign investor — Legal personality — Whether investment vehicles that lacked legal personality under municipal law satisfied the meaning of investor under the BITJurisdiction — Investment — Depository receipts — Territory — Whether depository receipts constituted an investment under the BIT — Whether depository receipts were an investment made in the territory of the StateAdmissibility — Notice — Whether the claimants failed to give adequate notice — Whether the State was barred from raising a belated objection on the adequacy of notice during the proceedingAdmissibility — Abuse of process — Third-party funding — Double recovery — Whether the claimants had engaged in an abuse of process because their claims were funded by a third party — Whether there was any risk of double recovery from arbitrations arising from the same measuresExpropriation — Taxation — Judicial act — Whether tax levies were arbitrary or discriminatory — Whether the State had prevented a company from honouring its disputed tax debt — Whether tax delinquency was an excuse for seizing assets and transferring them to State-owned entitiesRemedies — Damages — Standard of compensation — Valuation date — Whether compensation should cover the claimants’ proportionate share of an expropriated entity’s market value — Whether compensation had to be assessed at the time when an expropriated entity was removed from the register of companies or at an earlier date — Whether the value of the 206investment could be determined by the price of shares as they would have been traded on the stock market — Whether the date proposed by the claimants as the date of the last reliable stock price was acceptable — Whether a reduction was warranted because the claimants had speculated in distressed stockCosts — Third-party funding — Whether the allocation of costs was affected by the claimants’ funding by a third party — Whether the State’s failure to make advance payments affected the allocation of costs

Enkev Beheer BV (of the Netherlands) v. Republic of Poland

ICSID Reports ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 630-648
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Waiting Period ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Just Compensation ◽  
Default Rules ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Almost All

630Procedure — Addition of a party — Conditional application — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 22 — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 17 — Whether the UNCITRAL Rules or lex loci arbitri allowed for applications to be made conditional on a tribunal’s future decision — Whether the application was consistent with the State’s procedural rights — Whether the amendment to a claim under Article 22 of the UNCITRAL Rules allowed for the addition of a third party as claimantJurisdiction — Investment — Shares — Whether an investor’s shares and rights derived from those shares were protected investments under the BITJurisdiction — Investment — Assets of subsidiary — Whether profits, goodwill or know-how of a local subsidiary constituted investments of the investor protected by the BITJurisdiction — Consent — Cooling-off period — Premature claims — Whether the investor had communicated its own claims rather than those of its local subsidiary — Whether the investor’s failure to comply with a waiting period of six months under the BIT required a tribunal to deny jurisdiction or admissibility — Whether the negotiation of a local subsidiary’s dispute in good faith was relevant to jurisdiction over a foreign investor’s claimsInterpretation — Cooling-off period — VCLT, Article 31 — Object and purpose — Whether the object and purpose of the BIT required a tribunal not to adopt a strict or formalistic interpretation of the waiting period of six monthsRemedies — Declaratory award — Interpretation — Just compensation — Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction under the BIT to make a declaratory award on the interpretation and application of the term “just compensation”Jurisdiction — Dispute — Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction under the BIT to advise the parties of an imminent disputeExpropriation — Direct deprivation — Shares — Rights derived from shares — Whether the State directly deprived the investor of its rights as a shareholder in its local subsidiaryExpropriation — Indirect deprivation — Shares — Rights derived from shares — Whether the shares had lost all or almost all significant commercial value — Whether the measures were adopted in the public interest — Whether due process had been followed — Whether there were any undertakings by the StateExpropriation — Interpretation — “Just compensation” — Whether there was any difference between the terms of the BIT and general international law — Whether the meaning of just compensation could be determined in the abstract631Fair and equitable treatment — Whether the impending expropriation constituted a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether the claim concerned the investor’s rights derived from sharesFull protection and security — Whether the State failed to protect an investment from expropriation by local authorities — Whether the claim concerned the investor’s rights derived from sharesUmbrella clause — Whether there was any assurance directed at the investor that created any legal obligations — Whether the claim concerned the investor’s rights derived from sharesCosts — Arbitration costs — Variation by agreement — UNCITRAL Rules — Whether the terms of the BIT varied the default rules for the allocation of arbitration costs

Deutsche Bank AG v. Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

ICSID Reports ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 446-484
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
The State ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Responsibility Attribution ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Host State ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Debt Recovery

446Jurisdiction — Investment — Derivative transactions — Interpretation — Claims to money used to create an economic value — Claims to money associated with an investment — Whether a hedging agreement constituted an investment under the BITJurisdiction — Investment — Territorial requirement — Derivative transactions — Whether a hedging agreement satisfied the condition of territorial nexus to the host StateJurisdiction — Investment — ICSID Convention, Article 25 — Interpretation — Derivative transactions — Salini test — Contribution to economic development — Regularity of profit and return — Whether a hedging agreement constituted an investment — Whether all five elements of the Salini test were legal criteria for an investment under ICSID jurisdictionJurisdiction — Investment — ICSID Convention, Article 25 — Interpretation — Derivative transactions — Ordinary commercial transaction — Contingent liability — Whether a hedging agreement was an ordinary commercial transaction or a contingent liabilityJurisdiction — Contract — State-owned entity — Municipal law — Whether a hedging agreement was void because the transaction was outside a State-owned entity’s statutory authorityState responsibility — Attribution — Judicial acts — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 4 — Whether a superior court was an organ of the host StateState responsibility — Attribution — Central bank — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 4 — Whether a central bank was an organ of the host StateState responsibility — Attribution — State-owned entity — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 4 — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 5 — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 8 — Whether a State-owned entity was an organ of the State — Whether actions of a State-owned entity were attributable to the State as an exercise of governmental authority — Whether a State-owned entity was acting under instructions or the direction and control of the StateFair and equitable treatment — Judicial acts — Due process — Interim order — Political motive — Whether court orders violated the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether public statements of a senior judge evidenced the political motive of court ordersFair and equitable treatment — Autonomous standard — Interpretation — Minimum standard of treatment — Whether the standard of fair and equitable treatment was materially different from customary international law447Fair and equitable treatment — Government investigation — Due process — Bad faith — Transparency — Whether a central bank’s investigation violated the standard of fair and equitable treatmentExpropriation — Indirect expropriation — Contract — Derivative transaction — Substantial deprivation — Debt recovery — Municipal law — Whether the subsistence of a contractual debt and the possibility to claim under the chosen law of a third State prevented a finding of expropriation — Whether the possibility of recovery in a third State was to be assessed as a prerequisite in the cause of action of expropriation or as a matter of causation and quantumExpropriation — Indirect expropriation — Contract — Substantial deprivation — Legitimate regulatory authority — Proportionality — Whether an interference with contractual rights was an exercise of the host State’s legitimate regulatory authority — Whether the regulatory measures were proportionateRemedies — Damages — Causation — Contract — Debt recovery — Whether the claimant suffered damages if it had the possibility to recover a contractual debt in the courts of a third StateCosts — Indemnity — Egregious breach — Bad faith — Whether the egregious nature of the host State’s breaches of its international obligations meant the claimant was entitled to full recovery of its costs, legal fees and expenses

scholarly journals Third-party funding: The effect of the growing third-party funding industry in international arbitration on New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Eva Boolieris
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
The Law ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Party Funding

<p>The quickly rising trend of third-party funding in international arbitration is an extremely novel and complex challenge for the international arbitration community. Third-party funding has a long history in the law of litigation funding but this new trend will require the international arbitration community to grapple with this concept in a new setting. As domestic countries have taken hugely varying approaches to third-party funding in a litigation context, the international arbitration community has a wealth of choice available to it in deciding how to approach this trend. There are many outstanding issues in this area and there is much speculation as to how these issues will be resolved. New Zealand will be affected by the choices that the international arbitration community makes in this regard when New Zealand engages in international arbitration. The possibility of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) coming into force is also likely to exacerbate some of the effects of the choices made on the state of New Zealand in investor-state arbitration.</p>

Micula and Others v. Romania

2021 ◽  
Vol 196 ◽  
pp. 629-677
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Investment ◽  
The State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Arbitration Award

629Arbitration — Arbitration award — International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) — ICSID Convention, 1965 — Article 54 — Enforcement proceedings — Arbitration (International Investment Disputes) Act 1966 implementing ICSID Convention in domestic lawRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — ICSID Convention, 1965 — Obligations of the State under ICSID Convention — European Union law — Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Article 351 — Duty of sincere co-operation — Whether obligations of the State under EU law interfering with enforcement of an ICSID arbitration awardTreaties — Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Article 351 — Obligations of Member States of the European Union — Conflicting treaty obligations — Obligations arising under pre-EU treaties — Obligations arising under EU Treaties themselves — Whether EU Treaties affecting duty of a Member State to respect rights of non-member States under prior agreement — The law of the United Kingdom

MNSS BV and Recupero Credito Acciaio NV v. Montenegro

ICSID Reports ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 749-773
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Financial Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment

749Jurisdiction — Consent — ICSID Additional Facility — Contract — Waiver — Whether a waiver must be explicit and entered freely — Whether a waiver must be consistent with the public interest pursued by the parties to the BITJurisdiction — Consent — ICSID Additional Facility — Municipal law — Whether municipal law on foreign investment contained an offer of consent to arbitrationJurisdiction — Foreign investor — Corporate nationality — Good faith — Whether the BIT excluded claims by shell companies — Whether assuming corporate nationality for the purposes of obtaining treaty protections breached good faith requirements — Whether the claimants obtained protection after the disputeJurisdiction — Investment — ICSID Additional Facility — Interpretation — Whether the meaning of investment under the ICSID Convention applied in ICSID Additional Facility arbitrationJurisdiction — Investment — Loans — ICSID Convention, Article 25 — Salini test – Whether loans qualified as protected investmentsJurisdiction — Investment — Legality — Municipal law — General principle of international law — Whether a legality requirement was implied by the BIT — Whether a legality requirement was a general principle of investment lawJurisdiction — Domestic litigation requirement — Whether a requirement that domestic remedies be exhausted could be implied into the BIT — Whether a requirement that domestic remedies be exhausted existed as a matter of customary international lawFair and equitable treatment — Interpretation — Minimum standard of treatment — Breach of contract — Whether the treaty standard of fair and equitable treatment required a lower threshold for breach than the customary minimum standard of treatment — Whether breach of contract may result in State responsibility for breach of fair and equitable treatmentFair and equitable treatment — Financial institutions — Whether States were under a duty to warn investors of the condition of the financial system or of a specific bank — Whether the State acted reasonably in its regulatory supervision of financial institutionsState responsibility — Attribution — Central bank — Financial institutions — ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 8 — Direct control — Whether the conduct of a private financial institution was attributable to the State — Whether the supervision of a private financial institution by a central bank rendered its conduct under the direct control of the State750 Fair and equitable treatment — Contract — Whether refusal by a State to reduce the workforce was a breach of contract or a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether a refusal by the State to allow a company to scrap obsolete machinery was a breach of contract or a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether the refusal by the State to approve refinancing proposals was a breach of contract or a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether delays associated with governmental approval of transfers of funds amounted to a breach of contract or a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatmentFair and equitable treatment — Labour dispute — Whether the support by the State to a labour union amounted to a breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment — Whether the State was under an obligation to publicly support a restructuring plan to which it had agreed — Whether the refusal to approve financing proposals was a matter for the State in its capacity as shareholder or in a public capacity — Whether the State failed to maintain a stable legal and business environmentState responsibility — Attribution — Bankruptcy administrator — Whether the conduct of a bankruptcy administrator was attributable to the StateFull protection and security — Interpretation — Whether the standard of most constant protection and security was equivalent to the standard of full protection and security under international law — Whether the provision of no or inadequate police presence breached the standard — Whether claimants proved loss from breachMost-favoured-nation treatment — Like circumstances — Whether the standard applied to investments only or also to investors — Whether investors in different industries were in like circumstances — Whether investors in like circumstances were treated more favourablyFree transfer — Whether refusal by the State to approve payments constituted a breach of the treaty standardExpropriation — Indirect expropriation — Whether the conduct constituted a deprivation of the economic use and benefit of the investmentsExpropriation — Direct expropriation — Judicial act — Whether transfer of title by a bankruptcy administrator constitutes a direct expropriation — Whether a court decision may constitute a judicial expropriation in the absence of a denial of justiceCosts — ICSID Additional Facility — Whether parties should bear their own costs when the State was successful in some jurisdictional objections and the claimants proved breach but no loss

Does employee volunteerism contribute to financial performance? Effect of third-party assurance and financial performance of listed firms in emerging economies

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kofi Mintah Oware ◽  
T. Mallikarjunappa
Keyword(s):  
Stock Market ◽  
Financial Performance ◽  
Stock Price ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Probit Regression ◽  
Community Benefit ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Performance Effect ◽  
Employee Volunteerism ◽  
Indian Stock Market

Purpose Studies on employee volunteerism have inconsistency in results. This study aims to examine whether employee volunteerism contributes to financial performance, and if employee volunteerism creates community benefit for firm legitimacy. Design/methodology/approach The data covers 80 companies (640 firm-year observations) and uses the Indian stock market for the period 2010-2017 as a testing ground. Canonical correlation analysis, panel regression and panel probit regression are used in this study. Findings The first findings of the study show employee volunteerism through employee skill contribution, number of hours spent on volunteerism, employee cash contribution and employee material contribution provide the substantive contributions to community benefit and financial performance and also contribute a possible positive reflection on employee commitment. The second findings show that return on asset and return on equity do not improve the practice of employee volunteerism. However, the stock price return (SPR) improves the practice of employee volunteerism. The third findings show that the engagement of third-party assurance (TPA) improves the practice of employee volunteerism. Finally, TPA and SPR are more likely to cause a firm to undertake employee volunteerism. Research limitations/implications The research study is limited to large firms on the Indian stock market that submit sustainability reports. Practical implications An implication from the study suggests that the critical driver of employee volunteerism is employee skill contribution, and firms stand to benefit if well managed. Originality/value TPA and financial performance contribute an increase in employee volunteerism, and therefore deepens the scholarly debate on employee volunteerism. Employee volunteerism–community benefit nexus creates a new dimension to the theory of legitimacy for firms in an emerging economy.

The state of corporate citizenship in Brazil

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 598-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Amaral Lauriano ◽  
Heiko Spitzeck ◽  
João Henrique Dutra Bueno
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Citizenship ◽  
Organizational Structures ◽  
The State ◽  
Issue Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stakeholder Relationships ◽  
Leadership Engagement ◽  
Advanced Stages ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – This paper aims to present the state of corporate citizenship in Brazil. Design/methodology/approach – The results of a survey of Brazilian companies is used to analyze the state of corporate citizenship in Brazil. The survey was constructed using the methodology developed by Mirvis & Googins on measuring the stage of corporate citizenship, and 172 valid responses from Brazilian companies were received. Findings – Data suggest that Brazilian companies have an advanced understanding of corporate citizenship and the strategic intention to integrate citizenship into their business. When it comes to leadership, structures, issue management, stakeholder relationships and transparency, however, their maturity in terms of citizenship stays in less advanced stages. In sum, Brazilian companies are advanced in the concept but less developed in the practice of corporate citizenship. Research limitations/implications – The sample consists of 172 valid responses from companies in Brazil acting in various sectors and thus does not allow the determination of citizenship maturity in selected sectors. Practical implications – The research points to a gap regarding understanding and practice in corporate citizenship in Brazil. To foster evolution of corporate citizenship, Brazilian companies are advised to work especially on leadership engagement, organizational structures, issue management, stakeholder relationships and transparency. Originality/value – This is the first study about the maturity of corporate citizenship in Brazilian companies.

Policies for resolving insurgencies – lessons from third-party intervention in India

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 350-368
Author(s):  
Dhruv Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Asymmetric Information ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
State Government ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Third Party Intervention ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
Union Government

Purpose In this paper, the author develops a game theoretical model to understand why Union Government of India, as a third party, has used different schemes at different times in history to assist the State Governments in fighting the Naxalite insurgency. Comparing across schemes, it was found that though Matching Security Grants scheme was preferred in general, during asymmetric information scenario it led to an emergency situation wherein the Union Government had to provide the less preferred Bulk Security Grants. Later, it became difficult to withdraw these grants as the State Governments free rode by reducing own security contribution. The author finds that instead, in this scenario, Matching Development Grants are more suitable, as they incentivize the State Governments to reveal private information and help the Union Government exit its third-party role. For a practitioner involved in conflict resolution, these conclusions imply that as the desirability of policies can change diametrically overtime, Union Government must spend resources only on those heads of expenditure that provide both security and development benefits provided they aid in preventing flow of resources to Naxalites. Further, to end its assistance, the Union Government’s expenditures should also complement the capabilities of the State Government rather than substituting them. These results can also guide policy in other protracted civil wars with substantial third-party intervention, which are common these days. Design/methodology/approach The paper is an historical analysis of strategies used by Union and State Governments and Naxalites. The analysis is based on game theoretic tools supported with examples. Findings The Union Government must provide matching grants instead of bulk grants such as Central Armed Police Forces, and the grants should be aimed at building complementarities with the state governments’ security contributions. Under asymmetric information scenario, the Union and State Governments reduce their expenses incurred to fight the Naxalites. A Matching Development Grants scheme would have done better. Union Government must spend resources on heads of expenditure that provides both Development and Security benefits, to curb flow of resources to Naxalites, besides complementing the Security Contributions of the State Government. Research limitations/implications The research is limited by disaggregated data to test the hypotheses. It is also limited by the data on hidden variables like the contribution of the Naxalites to fighting. The research is also limited to the extent that individual groups in the war like police commanders, politicians and Naxalite commanders are not incorporated. Multiple asymmetric parties are also not considered; that may generalize the model to other theaters of insurgency. Practical implications Certain heads of expenditure such as roads, mobile communication, improving quality of investigation, preventing human rights violations by the security forces, etc. are both security and development enhancing. The Union Government's expenditures must be directed toward this end. Therefore, from a practitioner's perspective, the debate between greed and grievances exists not as a limitation but as a guide. The relevant articles of Constitution of India must be redrafted on these principles. Third-party interventions in other insurgencies may be revisited under these conclusions. Social implications Security and Development policies are tools for controlling Naxalite insurgency, which can also be used to prevent flow of resources to Naxalites. Security and development policies to resolving insurgencies are useful at different information scenarios. Therefore, information neutral policies should be preferred. Originality/value This paper has contributed theoretically in modeling continuing conflicts like Naxalite insurgency, explicitly. The author also shows that though the field of civil wars may have evolved along the Greed vs Grievance debate (Collier and Hoeffler, 2004), for a practitioner, the lines blur when it comes to solutions, as many heads of expenditures have features of both security and development. This paper also shows that when the Union Government faced asymmetric information scenario, the policy of matching development grants would be beneficial in long run though of limited value in short run. This is an important conclusion as the most intense period of violence was preceded by the asymmetric information scenario. Besides, it has relevance for the other civil wars with third-party intervention, such as NATO in Afghanistan.

scholarly journals The Third-Party Funding in Arbitration: A Challenge in Times of Crisis

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Maria João Mimoso ◽  
Joana Lourenço Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Technical Knowledge ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
The Third ◽  
Contractual Relationship ◽  
Party Funding ◽  
Financial Result

Arbitration as a way of resolving disputes between companies is essentially linked to the advantages of arbitration, especially with the speed and neutrality of arbitration, as well as the confidentiality, the possibility of choosing arbitrators with precise technical knowledge in the area of litigation, among others. The parties choose arbitration as a means of resolving disputes, relating to interests of an equity nature, bearing in mind that for some legislators the emphasis is on the availability of rights, arising from the contractual relationship that unites them. The payment of costs is a sine qua non condition for the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. The parties must proceed with the payment of taxes and fees, respectively to the arbitration center they have chosen and the arbitrators they have chosen. Considering that the economic situation of the companies may fluctuate, either during the execution of the main contract, or when the dispute arises, the constitution of the arbitral tribunal and during the procedural iter, the possibility of financing the arbitration was outlined. Third-Party Funding is a figure that involves a third-party, unrelated to the litigation, who will defray the expenses due by one of the parties to the arbitration. It will have as a counterpart the participation in the eventual financial result achieved through the success of the arbitration. As a methodology, in addition to analyzing the state of the art, we will indicate real cases and the reasons for the growth of this instrument, without forgetting the ethical issues involved.

scholarly journals Third-party funding: The effect of the growing third-party funding industry in international arbitration on New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Eva Boolieris
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
The Law ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Party Funding

<p>The quickly rising trend of third-party funding in international arbitration is an extremely novel and complex challenge for the international arbitration community. Third-party funding has a long history in the law of litigation funding but this new trend will require the international arbitration community to grapple with this concept in a new setting. As domestic countries have taken hugely varying approaches to third-party funding in a litigation context, the international arbitration community has a wealth of choice available to it in deciding how to approach this trend. There are many outstanding issues in this area and there is much speculation as to how these issues will be resolved. New Zealand will be affected by the choices that the international arbitration community makes in this regard when New Zealand engages in international arbitration. The possibility of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) coming into force is also likely to exacerbate some of the effects of the choices made on the state of New Zealand in investor-state arbitration.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document