Suchergebnisse

The settlement of interstate disputes through recourse to courts and tribunals has grown gradually over the years, not only through the creation of new mechanisms to that effect, but also by using existing courts and tribunals. How these different international dispute settlement mechanisms operate in theory and practice is the subject of this comparative analysis by academic and practicing lawyers. The book takes stock of the procedure applicable in various interstate dispute settlement bodies, including international and regional courts and tribunals, and arbitration. This comparative view is essential to a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the various procedural rules and regulations and the practical operation of international litigation. This book is aimed not only at scholars, but also at the courts and tribunals themselves, assisting them in revising their procedures, and at States and organisations developing future international legal mechanisms

Investment law and arbitration are currently the subject of profound reform discussions. Whether the investment law and arbitration reforms and reform proposals can properly be categorized as "old tools" that are used in "new ways," and more generally whether the reforms in the end will result in a "new economic world order" remains however to be seen. I argue that the "old tools" in international investment law and arbitration are not always simply "old tools" or an exercise in conservativism. Notably when one looks at substantive norms in investment treaties, the apparent "old tools" have been perfected and modernized. In other instances, such as the proposal for an "investment court," which could hardly be considered an "old tool," reform proposals do not seem to radically shift the investment regime toward a "new economic world order."

On July 31, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rendered its final decision on a claim brought by the liquidated Russian company OAO Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos (Yukos) against the Russian Federation (Russia), a decision that is the last in a series of three decisions in this case relating respectively to the admissibility of the application, the merits, and just satisfaction.A couple weeks prior to the ECtHR's decision, three arbitral tribunals established under the auspices of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) and functioning under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules had issued their final awards based on claims brought by three former shareholders of Yukos under the Energy Charter Treaty. The dispute, while brought by the shareholders of Yukos, in essence is the same as the one brought by Yukos against Russia before the European Court of Human Rights.