UNCITRAL ISDS Academic Forum: Multilateral Instrument on ISDS Reform Vision
This content delves into the UNCITRAL consensus on ISDS reform to enhance consistency, independence, and efficiency in arbitral rulings. It explores competing models for ISDS and proposes a Multilateral Investment Court for dispute settlement.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
UNCITRAL ISDS Academic Forum: Multilateral Instrument on ISDS Reform 23 April 2020 Investment Dispute Settlement la carte: Vision for the UNCITRAL Reform Process Stephan Schill and Geraldo Vidigal
The The Starting Starting Point: The UNCITRAL Consensus Point: The UNCITRAL Consensus Reform is desirable to address concerns of (1) consistency, coherence, predictability, and correctness of arbitral rulings; (2) independence, impartiality, and diversity of decision-makers; and (3) costs and duration of proceedings. Need Need for for a a Multilateral Multilateral Solution Solution 2
The Problem: Competing Models for ISDS The Problem: Competing Models for ISDS (Reformed) Arbitration Investment Court Appeals Mechanism Domestic Courts Inter-State 3
The Solution: Dispute Settlement la Carte The Solution: Dispute Settlement la Carte Multilateral Institution for Dispute Settlement on Investment (MIDSI) Administers Multilateral Investment Court Inter-State Arbitration Investor-State Arbitration State s Decision
Modes of Consent Modes of Consent Optional Clause (reciprocal/unconditional) Bilateral Agreements Unilateral Offer / Contract UNCLOS Model (Options/Default)
Centripetal Force: The Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) Centripetal Force: The Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) Dispute Settlement Functions Systemic Functions Procedural Functions
MIC MIC - - Dispute Settlement Functions Dispute Settlement Functions Court (First & Last Instance) Appeals from Awards Annulment of Awards Consent-based
MIC MIC Procedural Functions Procedural Functions Challenges to Arbitrators Provisional Measures
MIC MIC - - Systemic Function Systemic Function (Advisory) Opinions Preliminary Ruling
MIDSI MIDSI The Organization The Organization Elects/Checks the Court Technical Assistance Forum for Negotiations Law/Politics Balance
Stephan SCHILL s.w.b.schill@uva.nl L Geraldo VIDIGAL g.vidigal@uva.nl Stephan W. Schill and Geraldo Vidigal, Cutting the Gordian Knot: Investment Dispute Settlement la Carte (2018) (RTA Exchange) <https://www.ictsd.org/sites/default/files/research/rta_exchange_- _investment_dispute_settlement_-_schill_and_vidigal.pdf> Stephan W. Schill and Geraldo Vidigal, Designing Investment Dispute Settlement la carte: Insights from Comparative Institutional Design Analysis (Jan. 2020) <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3519259>
