IN SEARCH FOR THE OPTIMAL MODEL FOR RESOLVING INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT DISPUTES

Kristina Andjelić

DOI Number
10.22190/FULP1604531A
First page
531
Last page
540

Abstract

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has been set as an authoritative forum for investment dispute resolution. But lately it’s been perceived as dealing with legitimacy crisis. At the same time, within the framework of TTIP negotiations, the European Commission has proposed the formation of International Investment Court. It is still uncertain whether this proposal is going to be adopted and implemented, but among its anticipated effects is the replacement of investor-to-state dispute settlement system, which is reflected in ICSID. This paper explores the uniqueness of ICSID by focusing on a particular part of procedure: the annulment. The analysis demonstrates that the annulment procedure raises significant legal and political issues, which have the potential to undermine social legitimacy of the system as a whole. The aim of this paper is to look into the possibility to place the International Investment Court as a mode to overcome those issues, both legal and political ones.

Keywords

ICSID, International Investment Court, annulment, appeal, legitimacy

Full Text:

PDF

References

Baetens, F., (2011). Enforcement of Arbitral Awards:'To ICSID or Not to ICSID'is Not the Question, Investment Treaty Arbitration and International Law, Juris Arbitration Series 5, 2011, pp. 211-228.

Bishop, D., (2015)."Investor–State Dispute Settlement Under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Have the Negotiations Run Aground?, ICSID Review 30(1), 2015, pp. 1-9

Broches, A., (1987). Awards rendered pursuant to the ICSID Convention: binding force, finality, recognition, enforcement, execution., ICSID review 2.2, 1987, pp. 287-334.

Brower, C., Schill, S., (2008). Is Arbitration a Threat or a Boom to the Legitimacy of International Investment Law, Chi. J. Int'l L. 9, 2008, pp. 471-498, 471.

Burke-White, W., Von Staden, A., (2007). Investment protection in extraordinary times: the interpretation and application of non-precluded measures provisions in bilateral investment treaties, Virginia Journal of International Law 48(2), 2007, pp. 307-410,

Burke-White, W., Von Staden, A., (2010). Private Litigation in a Public Law Sphere: The Standard of Review in Investor-State Arbitrations, Yale Journal of International Law 35, 2010, pp. 283-346, 300.

Caron, D., (1992). Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process: Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal, ICSID Rev.-FILJ 7, 1992, pp. 21-56

Collins, D., (2013). ICSID Annulment Committee Appointments: Too Much Discretion for the Chairman?, Journal of International Arbitration 30.4, 2013, pp. 333-343.

Feldman, M., (1987). The annulment proceedings and the finality of ICSID arbitral awards, ICSID review 2, no. 1, 1987, pp. 85-110.

Kim, D., (2011), Annulment Committee's Role in Multiplying Inconsistency in Icsid Arbitration: The Need to Move Away from an Annulment-Based System, NYUL Rev. 86, 2011, pp. 252-254

Martinez, E., (2012). Understanding the Debate over Necessity: Unanswered Questions and Future Implications of Annulments in the Argentine Gas Cases, Duke J Comp & Int'l L 23(/), 2012, pp. 149-186,

Padilla IV, S. B., (1988). Some Available Options to Save the Viability of ICSID Arbitration in the Light of the Annulment Awards in Klockner v. Cameroon and Amco Asia v. Republic of Indonesia, Phil. LJ, 63, 1988, pp. 321-362,

Pauwelyn, J., (2014). At the edge of chaos? Foreign investment law as a complex adaptive system, how it emerged and how it can be reformed, ICSID Review 29.2, 2014, pp. 372-418.

Puig, S., (2012). Emergence & Dynamism in International Organizations: ICSID, Investor-State Arbitration & International Investment Law, Geo. J. Int'l L. 44, 2012, pp. 531-607,

Roberts, A., (2013). Clash of Paradigms: Actors and Analogies Shaping the Investment Treaty System, American journal of international law 107.1, 2013, pp. 45-94.

Schreuer, C., (2011). From ICSID Annulment to Appeal Half Way Down the Slippery Slope, The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 10.2 , 2011, pp. 211-225.

Stone Sweet, A., (2010). Investor-State Arbitration: Proportionality's New Frontier, Law & Ethics of Human Rights 4.1, 2010, pp. 48-76.

Tams, C., (2009). Is There A Need for an ICSID Appellate Structure?, The International Convention for the Settlement of Investment Disputes: Taking Stock After. Vol. 40, 2009, pp. 223-250

Tienhaara, K., (2011). Once BITten, twice shy?: The uncertain future of ‘shared sovereignty’in investment treaty arbitration, Policy and Society 30.3, 2011, pp. 185-196.

Von Staden, A., (2011). Towards Greater Doctrinal Clarity in Investor-State Arbitration: The CMS, Sempra, and Enron Annulment Decisions, Czech Yearbook of International Law 2, 2011, pp. 207-229.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22190/FULP1604531A

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 1450-5517 (Print)
ISSN 2406-1786 (Online)