Establishing an Appeal Mechanism for Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Challenges, Feasibility, and Options
Keywords:
Legitimacy crisis, relief program, Rules on Transparency, Opt-in Convention, Vienna Convention on the Law of TreatiesAbstract
There is a growing international consensus stating investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS), with international investment arbitration as the main means of dispute settlement, needs to be reformed, but the reform proposals have not yet been finalised. Among the many options, the option of establishing an appeal mechanism has generated extensive discussion. The permanent, independent and corrective nature of the appeals mechanism helps to address the lack of independence and impartiality of arbitrators under the ISDS mechanism, the inconsistency of arbitral awards, and the lack of control mechanisms. It also has benefit of improving the accuracy of awards. Under the current system of international investment treaties, establishing a multilateral appeal mechanism presents many challenges. However, the Mauritius Convention on Transparency, which uses multilateral instruments to amend bilateral treaties, provides evidence that establishing a multilateral appeal mechanism is feasible.References
Alvarez, H. C. 2009. Judicial review of NAFTA Chapter 11 arbitral awards. In F. Bachand, & E. Gaillard (Eds.), Fifteen years of NAFTA chapter 11 arbitration (pp.103-171). Juris.
American Arbitration Association. 2013. Optional appellate arbitration rules. https://www.adr.org/sites/default/files/AAA-ICDR_Optional_Appellate_Arbitration_Rules.pdf
Corten, O., & Klein, P. (Eds.). 2011. The Vienna Conventions on the law of treaties: A commentary. Oxford Commentaries on Interna.
Drahozal, C. R. 1998. Judicial incentives and the appeals process. Southern Methodist University Law Review 51(3), 469-70.
European Court of Arbitration. 2015. Arbitration rules of the European court of arbitration. https://cour-europe-arbitrage.org/arbitration-rules/
International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution. 2015. Appellate arbitration procedure. https://www.cpradr.org/resource-center/rules/arbitration/appellate-arbitration-procedure
JAMS. 2003. JAMS optional arbitration appeal procedure. https://www.jamsadr.com/files/Uploads/Documents/JAMS-Rules/JAMS_Optional_Appeal_Procedures-2003.pdf
Kim, D. 2011. The annulment committee’s role in multiplying inconsistency—in ICSID arbitration. New York University Law Review 86(1), 242.
Liu, S. 2009. An analysis of the issue of establishing an appeal mechanism for international investment arbitration. Modern Law (5),122-130. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:XDFX.0.2009-05-014
Roberts, A. 2013. Clash of paradigms: Actors and analogies shaping the investment treaty system. American Journal of International Law (7), 45-46.
Wang, Y. Z. 2011. Legalization of international investment dispute settlement: Achievements and challenges. Contemporary Law Review (3), 16. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:DDFX.0.2011-03-003
Xiao, J. 2015. Feasibility study on the establishment of an international investment arbitration appeals mechanism—from the negotiation of bilateral investment treaties between China and the United States. Legal and Business Studies 2(2), 168. http://doi:10.16390/j.cnki.issn1672-0393.2015.02.018
Yannaca-Small, K. 2006. Improving the system of investor-state dispute settlement. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/631230863687
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
It is the author’s sole responsibility to ensure that all work submitted does not infringe on any existing copyright. Authors should obtain permission to reproduce or adapt copyrighted material and provide evidence of approval upon submitting the final version of the manuscript. Views expressed by authors are entirely their own. The Editorial Board shall not be responsible for views expressed and the language used in every article.
