Three leading international arbitral institutions annually co-sponsor a joint colloquium. Leaders of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the Int'l Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration, and the American Arbitration Association's International Centre for Dispute Resolution will discuss priorities and trends at their respective institutions, in Washington, DC, December 7, 2018.
Other sessions will address practical challenges faced by practitioners—i.e. ethical dilemmas, media scrutiny, compliance with awards—and offer guidance from experts in the field on how to manage these effectively.
Showing posts with label ICSID. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ICSID. Show all posts
Monday, December 3, 2018
Monday, January 2, 2017
Investment Arbitration Against Argentina
Saturday, July 19, 2014
International Investment Arbitration
Challenging arbitrators under ICSID and UNCITRAL rules. Challenges of International Investment Arbitrators: How Does It Work and Does It Work? by Chiara Giorgetti of the Richmond University School of Law. The Abstract:
In this article, I examine and assess how challenges are decided in international investment arbitration, and suggest ways to improve challenge proceedings. The analysis focuses only on the rules of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States (ICSID Rules) and the 1976 and 2010 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules ("UNCITRAL . Rules (1976)" and "UNCITRAL Rules (2010)") because the great majority of international investment proceedings occur under either of those rules. In the first part, I describe the qualities required for an arbitrator's appointment under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules. I then assess.and compare the standards for challenges under those rules, first procedurally, and then substantially. In the conclusion, I suggest that the ICSID challenges procedures should be amended to be more in line with the UNCITRAL Rules. Specifically, I argue that a neutral and independent body should decide arbitrator challenges in ICSID proceedings. I also argue that the standard applied in challenges to arbitrators in ICSID proceedings is too onerous, and should be interpreted taking into consideration the International Bar Association Guidelines for Conflict of Interest in International Arbitration (IBA Guidelines).
In this article, I examine and assess how challenges are decided in international investment arbitration, and suggest ways to improve challenge proceedings. The analysis focuses only on the rules of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States (ICSID Rules) and the 1976 and 2010 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules ("UNCITRAL . Rules (1976)" and "UNCITRAL Rules (2010)") because the great majority of international investment proceedings occur under either of those rules. In the first part, I describe the qualities required for an arbitrator's appointment under ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules. I then assess.and compare the standards for challenges under those rules, first procedurally, and then substantially. In the conclusion, I suggest that the ICSID challenges procedures should be amended to be more in line with the UNCITRAL Rules. Specifically, I argue that a neutral and independent body should decide arbitrator challenges in ICSID proceedings. I also argue that the standard applied in challenges to arbitrators in ICSID proceedings is too onerous, and should be interpreted taking into consideration the International Bar Association Guidelines for Conflict of Interest in International Arbitration (IBA Guidelines).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)