| 1. |
- Álvarez Zárate, José Manuel, et al.
(författare)
-
Duration of Investor-State Dispute Settlement Proceedings
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of World Investment & Trade. - : Brill. - 1660-7112 .- 2211-9000. ; 21:2-3, s. 300-335
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Speed is often touted as an advantage of arbitration. In recent years, however, some have worried that investment arbitration risks losing this advantage. Concerns about the length of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) proceedings have also been raised in the discussion about IS DS reform. This article analyses the duration of IS DS proceedings applying a data-centric approach and evaluates the impact of proposed ISDS reforms on the duration of proceedings. After some terminological clarifications on when proceedings are 'excessively' long, the article sets out the evidence on the length of proceedings using several data-sets. As a comparator, we present data on the length of World Trade Organization (WTO) proceedings, even though we urge caution as to the usefulness of such a comparator. The article then discusses the impact of various reform proposals on the duration of proceedings, namely improving ISDS, adding an appellate mechanism, establishing a multilateral investment court and abolishing ISDS.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Mistelis, Loukas, et al.
(författare)
-
Denial of Benefits Clause
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Max Planck encyclopedias of international law (MPIL). - : Oxford University Press. - 9780199231690
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Denial of benefits’ clauses, while having gained substantial popularity in the past ten prolific years of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (‘ISDS’), are not a common or typical presence in most traditional International Investment Agreements (‘IIAs’), be it in the form of Bilateral Investment Treaties (‘BITs’) or in the form of Free Trade Agreements (‘FTAs’). The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (‘UNCTAD’) Investment Policy Hub lists 215 IIAs containing a ‘denial of benefits’ clause out of a total number of 2,572 mapped IIAs.This paper analyses the framework of the ‘denial of benefits’ clause and its application by tribunals with respect to the procedural requirements of the clause (jurisdiction, time, and effect). It appears that there are two distinct lines of jurisprudence on the procedural requirements of ‘denial of benefits’ clauses: tribunals constituted under the Energy Charter Treaty (‘ECT’) and tribunals constituted under US BITs and the Dominican Republic-Central America FTA (‘CAFTA-DR’).
|
|
