scholarly journals Proposed Regulation of Third-Party Funding in Investor-State Dispute Settlement

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-87
Author(s):  
Matias Tamlander
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Conflicts Of Interests ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Proposed Regulation ◽  
Party Funding

Third-party litigation funding is increasingly used to finance legal claims in investor-state dispute settlement, with financiers funding investor claims against sovereign states in exchange for a share of potentially substantial compensation rendered in eventual arbitral awards. A chiefly unregulated phenomenon, third-party funding has been perceived especially controversial in the context of the investment arbitration regime, a system some allege is already ingrained with inequities. Third-party funding raises numerous policy questions, such as conflicts of interests, disclosure, costs of the proceedings, and even the entire permissibility of the practice in investor-state dispute settlement. This review raises various issues and concerns related to third-party funding in investor-state dispute settlement and presents the regulatory efforts and criticism thereof with regards to the reform of rules of both the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

scholarly journals Remarks by Natalie Y. Morris-Sharma

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 198-200
Author(s):  
Natalie Y. Morris-Sharma
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
The United Nations

These remarks approach the panel topic of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) at the crossroads, by reflecting on the ongoing discussions on ISDS reform that are taking place at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). There are three sets of factors likely to inform how ISDS is being transformed.

Part III Guide to Key Jurisdictional Issues, 17 Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clodfelter Mark A ◽  
Tsutieva Diana
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Core ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

The last decade has seen an increase in the efforts of respondent States to have their own claims against investor-claimants heard in investor-State proceedings commenced against them. The investment arbitration case law has revealed a host of legal and practical difficulties in admitting counterclaims. Most of these stem from the core requirement that parties must consent to submit their differences to investment arbitration. The applicable arbitration rules have also been cited as a bar to counterclaims. This chapter explores the functionality of applicable procedural rules as bases for an investment tribunal’s authority to hear counterclaims under the two main investment law regimes: the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID) Convention and Arbitration Rules and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules. A review of the milestone cases under these two regimes reveals the major problems that have arisen.

Metanarratives as a Trap: Critique of Investor–State Arbitration Reform

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 949-971
Author(s):  
Ksenia Polonskaya
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Procedural Approach ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Critical Conversation

ABSTRACT The ongoing reform of investment arbitration at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law can have a lasting impact on international investment protection for the decades ahead. This paper examines the current discussions at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law to explain why the current focus on reforming the procedural aspects of the system is too narrow. As a result of such a narrow approach, the reform risks to miss an opportunity to address the global challenges, e.g. climate change. In advancing its critique of the ongoing reform, the paper adopts the lens of metanarrative by Jean-François Lyotard. By relying on Lyotard, this paper cautions that such values as feasibility and efficiency in conducting the reform should not obscure the need for a critical conversation on the purpose of the reform, which is to ensure the legitimacy of investment arbitration in the future. As this paper argues, a current procedural approach to the reform cannot meaningfully contribute to this objective.

Part I Investment Treaties and the Settlement of Investment Disputes: The Framework, 3 International Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Onwuamaegbu Ucheora
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Chamber Of Commerce ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Chamber Of Commerce

This chapter begins by introducing the three institutions under whose auspices treaty-based investor-state arbitration proceedings have most commonly been conducted: the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), and the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC). Following a general overview of the three institutions, it examines certain procedural issues that may be considered by parties in deciding among them, assuming that consent exists. The intention is to highlight certain provisions in their arbitration rules that best demonstrate the main differences between them. Finally, the chapter examines the Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law under which the majority of ad hoc investor-state arbitrations have so far been conducted and draws certain contrasts between them and the rules of the institutions earlier discussed.

Empirical Perspectives on Investment Arbitration: What Do We Know? Does It Matter?

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 188-250
Author(s):  
Daniel Behn ◽  
Malcolm Langford ◽  
Laura Létourneau-Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
Data Modelling ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Legal Cost

Abstract Due to the problem-centric nature of its mandate, empirical research has been relatively central in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) investment arbitration reform process. In this article, the authors seek to provide a state-of-the-art summary and assessment of empirical studies on the six identified concerns of states: legal cost, duration of proceedings, consistency, correctness, diversity and independence. The article asks: (1) What do we know? and (2) Does it matter? The survey of evidence reveals an emerging base of quantitative, qualitative and computational evidence for justifying some but not all concerns and understanding their causes. However, there are challenges in accessing all relevant data, modelling outcomes and evaluating whether there was normatively a problem. The article concludes by indicating that some concerns are clearly justified, others not, and others fall within an unknown category.

scholarly journals Model UU Arbitrase Dagang Internasional dari PBB

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 605
Author(s):  
S. Gautama
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law

UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law), Panitia PBB tentang Hukum Dagang Internasional, pada tanggal 21 Juni 1985 telah menerima suatu Model Undang-undang tentang hukum Arbitrase Dagang lnternasional. Karya dari UNCITRAL ini dipandang sebagaipelengkap daripada UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (Kaidah-kaidah Arbitrase dari UNCITRAL) dan UNCITRAL Conciliation Rules.

scholarly journals Beberapa Catatan tentang Arbitrase Dagang Internasional dari PBB

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 321
Author(s):  
Sudargo Gautama
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law

Seperti diketahui UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on international Trade Law) telah mempersiapkan suatu Model Undang2 tentang Arbitrase Dagang lnternasional yang diterima pada sidangnya. di Wina bulan Juni 1985 dan kemudian dikuatkan dengan resolusi dari Sidang Umum PBB pada tanggal 11 Desember 1985.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document