Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:00:04.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Select Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2021

Campbell McLachlan
Campbell McLachlan
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Institute of International Law's Resolution on the Equality of Parties Before International Investment Tribunals
Introduction, Text and Commentaries
 , pp. 111 - 120
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Al-Khasawneh, A 2015. ‘Foreword’, in Savarian, A, Fontanelli, F, Baker, R and Tsevelekos, V (eds), Procedural Fairness in International Courts and Tribunals (London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law)Google Scholar
Alexandrov, S A and Carlson, M 2010. ‘The Opportunity to Be Heard: Accommodating Amicus Curiae Participation in Investment Treaty Arbitration’, in Arias, D and Fernández-Ballesteros, M (eds), Liber Amicorum: Bernardo Cremades (Madrid: La Ley)Google Scholar
Amado, J, Kern, J and Rodríguez, M 2018. Arbitrating the Conduct of International Investors (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Antonopoulos, C 2011. Counterclaims before the International Court of Justice (The Hague: TMC Asser Press)Google Scholar
Atanansova, D, Benoit, A M and Ostransky, J 2014. ‘Legal Framework for Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration’ 31 J Int’l Arb 357Google Scholar
Bain, E 2018. ‘When Some Are More Equal than Others: The Need for a More Substantive Conception of “Equality of the Parties” in Investment Arbitration’, in Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy 2015–2016 (New York: Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Bantekas, I 2020a. ‘Equal Treatment of Parties in International Commercial Arbitration’ 69 ICLQ 991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bantekas, I 2020b. ‘Article 18: Equal Treatment of Parties’, in Bantekas, I, Ortolani, P, Ali, S, Gomez, M A and Polkinghome, M (eds), UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration: A Commentary (Cambridge University Press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beechey, J 2019. ‘The Pandora’s Box of Third-Party Funding: Some Practical Suggestions for Arbitrators in Light of Recent Developments’ 20 ICCA Congress Series 558Google Scholar
Berger, K P and Jensen, J O 2016. ‘Due Process Paranoia and the Procedural Judgment Rule: A Safe Harbour for Procedural Management Decisions by International Arbitrators’ 32 Arb Int’l 415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernadini, P 2017. ‘Reforming Investor–State Dispute Settlement: The Need to Balance Both Parties’ Interests’ 32 ICSID Rev – FILJ 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, R D, Crawford, J and Reisman, W M 2014. Foreign Investment Disputes: Cases, Materials and Commentary, 2nd edn (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International)Google Scholar
Blair, C and Gojković, E V 2018. ‘WikiLeaks and Beyond: Discerning an International Standard for the Admissibility of Illegally Obtained Evidence’ 33 ICSID Rev – FILJ 235Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L 2018. ‘Changes in the Balance of Rights and Obligations: Towards Investor Responsibilization’, in El Ghadban, T, Mazuy, C and Senegacnik, A (eds), La Protection des investissements étrangers, vers une reaffirmation de l’Etat? Actes du colloque du 2 juin 2017 (Paris: Pedone)Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L 2015. ‘Transparency in Investor–State Arbitration: An Incremental Approach’ 2 BCDR Int’l Arb Rev 59Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L 2005. ‘Making the Proceedings Public and Allowing Third-Party Interventions: Are the New Generation Bilateral Investment Treaties (US, Canada) Bifurcating Investment Arbitration from International Commercial Arbitration?’ 6 JWIT 105Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L 2004. ‘Transparency and “Amicus Curiae” Briefs’ 5 JWIT 333Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L, Bonnin, V, Kaufmann-Kohler, G and Mbengue, M M 2006. ‘Consolidation of Proceedings in Investment Arbitration: How Can Multiple Proceedings Arising from the Same or Related Situations Be Handled Efficiently?’ Final Report on the Geneva Colloquium held on 22 April 2006, 21 ICSID Rev – FILJ 59Google Scholar
Boisson de Chazournes, L and Mbengue, M M 2003. ‘The Amici Curiae and the WTO Dispute Settlement System: The Doors Are Open’ 2 LPICT 205Google Scholar
Bonnitcha, J, Poulsen, L and Waibel, M, 2017. The Political Economy of the Investment Treaty Regime (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Boon, K E 2018. ‘Investment Treaty Arbitration: Making a Place for Small Claims’ 19 JWIT 667Google Scholar
Born, G 2014. International Commercial Arbitration, 2nd edn (Alphen aan den Rijn:Kluwer)Google Scholar
Born, G 2011. ‘The US Supreme Court and Class Action Arbitration: A Tragedy of Errors’ (1 July), www.kluwerarbitrationblog.comGoogle Scholar
Born, G 2009. International Commercial Arbitration, 1st edn (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer)Google Scholar
Bottini, G, Titi, C, Pérez-Aznar, F, Chaisse, J, Jovanovic, M and Puigdemont Sola, O 2020. ‘Excessive Costs and Recoverability of Costs Awards in Investment Arbitration’ 21 JWIT 251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgeois, V, Eyskens, W, Fernandez-Bertier, M and Stoyanov, M 2018. ‘Procedural Interplay between Investment Arbitration and Criminal Proceedings in the Context of Corruption Allegations’ Belgian Review of Arbitration 7Google Scholar
Broches, A 1972. ‘The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States’ 136 Recueil des Cours 331Google Scholar
Bronckers, M 2015. ‘Is Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Superior to Litigation before Domestic Courts?’ 18 JIEL 655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, C N and Kumar, S P 2015. ‘Investomercial Arbitration: Whence Cometh It? What Is It? Whither Goeth It?’ 30 ICSID Rev – FILJ 35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, C N and Rosenberg, C B 2013. ‘The Death of the Two-Headed Nightingale: Why the Paulsson-van den Berg Presumption that Party-Appointed Arbitrators Are Untrustworthy Is Wrongheaded’ 29 Arb Int’l 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown de Vejar, K and Baldwin, C 2019. ‘The Economics of Access: Systemic Imbalances in ISDS’ 20 ICCA Congress Series 520Google Scholar
Bubrowski, H 2013. ‘Balancing IIA Arbitration through the Use of Counterclaims’, in Mestral, A de and Lévesque, C (eds), Improving International Investment Agreements (Abingdon: Routledge)Google Scholar
Bungenberg, M and Reinisch, A 2019. ‘Design and Implementation of a Two-Tiered MIC’, in From Bilateral Arbitral Tribunals and Investment Courts to a Multilateral Investment Court: Options Regarding the Institutionalization of Investor–State Dispute Settlement, European Yearbook of International Economic Law Series, 2nd edn (Berlin: Springer)Google Scholar
Carlston, K 1946. The Process of International Arbitration (New York: Columbia University Press)Google Scholar
Caron, D and Caplan, L 2013. The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: A Commentary, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Chaisse, J, Choukroune, L and Jusoh, S (eds) 2020. Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy (Singapore: Springer)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaisse, J and Sejko, D 2016. ‘Investor–State Arbitration Distorted: When the Claimant Is a State’, in Choukroune, L (ed), Judging the State in International Trade and Investment Law: Sovereignty Modern, the Law and the Economics (Singapore: Springer)Google Scholar
Cheng, B 1953. General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (London: Stevens)Google Scholar
Cleis, M N 2017. The Independence and Impartiality of ICSID Arbitrators: Current Case Law, Alternative Approaches, and Improvement Suggestions (Leiden: Brill Nijhoff)Google Scholar
Collins, Lord (gen ed), 2012. Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws, 15th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell)Google Scholar
Crawford, J R 2015. ‘Challenges to Arbitrators in ICSID Arbitration’, in Caron, D, Schill, S W, Cohen Smutny, A and Triantafilou, E E (eds), Practising Virtue: Inside International Arbitration (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Crawford, J R 2017. ‘The Ideal Arbitrator: Does One Size Fit All?’ 32 Am U Int’l LR 1003Google Scholar
Croft, C, Kee, C and Waincymer, J 2013. A Guide to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Darwazeh, N and Leleu, A 2016. ‘Disclosure and Security for Costs or How to Address Imbalances Created by Third-Party Funding’ 33 J Int’l Arb 125Google Scholar
De Brabandere, E 2012. ‘Individuals in Advisory Proceedings before the International Court of Justice: Equality of the Parties and the Court’s Discretionary Authority’ 11 LPICT 253Google Scholar
De Brabandere, E and Lepeltak, J 2012. ‘Third-Party Funding in International Investment Arbitration’ 27 ICSID Rev – FILJ 379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Nanteuil, A 2018. ‘Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Old Questions, New Answers?’ 17 LPICT 374Google Scholar
Della Cananea, G 2016. ‘Audi alteram partem’ in Due Process of Law beyond the State (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Di Rosa, P 2019. ‘Challenges for Counsel in the Representation of States and State-Owned Entities in International Arbitration: A Practitioner’s Perspective’ 20 ICCA Congress Series 607Google Scholar
Dolzer, R and Schreuer, C 2012. Principles of International Investment Law, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Douglas, Z 2009. The International Law of Investment Claims (Cambridge University Press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Hosseny, F 2018. Civil Society in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Status and Prospects (Leiden: Brill Nijhoff)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Federation for Investment Law and Arbitration (EFILA) 2015. ‘A Response to the Criticism against ISDS’ (17 May), http://efila.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EFILA_in_response_to_the-criticism_of_ISDS_final_draft.pdfGoogle Scholar
Fach Gómez, K 2019. Key Duties of International Investment Arbitrators: A Transnational Study of Legal and Ethical Dilemmas (Cham: Springer Nature)Google Scholar
Feldman, M 2016. ‘State-Owned Enterprises as Claimants in International Investment Arbitration’ 31 ICSID Rev – FILJ 24Google Scholar
Fouret, J, Gerbay, R and Alvarez, G M (eds) 2019. The ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules: A Practical Commentary (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, S D 2019. ‘Costs – Risks and Reality’, in Arbitration Costs: Myths and Realities in Investment Treaty Arbitration (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Franck, T 1993. ‘Fairness in the International Legal and Institutional System’ 240 Recueil des Cours 9Google Scholar
Frignati, V 2016. ‘Ethical Implications of Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration’ 32 Arb Int’l 505Google Scholar
Gaillard, E and Savage, J (eds) 1999. Fouchard, Gaillard, Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration (The Hague and Boston, MA: Kluwer Law International)Google Scholar
Giorgetti, C and Dunoff, J L 2019. ‘Ex Pluribus Unum? On the Form and Shape of a Common Code of Ethics in International Litigation’ 113 AJIL Unbound 312Google Scholar
Giorgetti, C, Ratner, S, Dunoff, J, Hamamoto, S, Nottage, L, Schill, S W and Waibel, M 2020. ‘Independence and Impartiality of Adjudicators in Investment Dispute Settlement: Assessing Challenges and Reform Options’ 21 JWIT 441Google Scholar
Goh, N 2018. ‘The Power of Tribunals to Enjoin Criminal Proceedings: A Widening Power or Converging High Bar?’ 33 ICSID Rev – FILJ 88Google Scholar
Gomez-Acebo, A 2019. ‘A Special Role of Party-Appointed Arbitrators?’ 20 ICCA Congress Series 381Google Scholar
Gottwald, E 2007. ‘Leveling the Playing Field: Is It Time for a Legal Assistance Center for Developing Nations in Investment Treaty Arbitration?’ 22 Am U Int’l LR 237Google Scholar
Gomula, J 1991. ‘The International Court of Justice and Administrative Tribunals of International Organizations’ 13 Mich JIL 83Google Scholar
Gross, L 1958. ‘Participation of Individuals in Advisory Proceedings before the International Court of Justice: Question of Equality between the Parties’ 52 AJIL 16Google Scholar
Hanotiau, B 2020. Complex Arbitrations: Multi-Party, Multi-Contract, Multi-Issue – A Comparative Study, 2nd edn (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International)Google Scholar
Hepburn, J and Kabra, R 2017. ‘India’s New Model BIT: Fit for Purpose?’ 1 Indian LR 95Google Scholar
Hoffmann, A 2018. ‘The Impact of Third-Party Funding on an ICSID Tribunal’s Decision on Security for Costs’, in Akbaba, M and Capurro, G (eds), International Challenges in Investment Arbitration (New York: Routledge)Google Scholar
Honlet, J C 2015. ‘Recent Decisions on Third-Party Funding in Investment Arbitration’ 30 ICSID Rev – FILJ 699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ishikawa, T 2019. ‘Counterclaims and the Rule of Law in Investment Arbitration’ 113 AJIL Unbound 33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaeckenbeeck, G S 1946. ‘Upper Silesia under the League of Nations’ 243 Annals AAPSS 129Google Scholar
Kao, C 2019. ‘Assessing the Rules of Appointing Arbitrators under the EU’s Investment Court System’ 27 Eur Rev 210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann-Kohler, G and Potestà, M 2020. Investor–State Dispute Settlement and National Courts: Current Framework and Reform Options, European Yearbook of International Economic Law (Cham: Springer)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazazi, M 1995. Burden of Proof and Related Issues: A Study on Evidence before International Tribunals (The Hague, London and Boston: Kluwer)Google Scholar
Kessedjian, C 2020. ‘Le tiers impartial et indépendant en droit international: Juge, arbitre, médiateur, conciliateur’ 403 Recueil des Cours 49Google Scholar
Kho, S, Yanovich, A, Casey, B and Strauss, J 2017. ‘The EU TTIP Investment Court Proposal and the WTO Dispute Settlement System’ 32 ICSID Rev – FILJ 326Google Scholar
Kohen, M and Dumberry, P 2019. The Institute of International Law’s Resolution on State Succession and State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Kolb, R 2013. The International Court of Justice (Oxford and Portland, OR: Hart)Google Scholar
Kolo, A 2010. ‘Witness Intimidation, Tampering and Other Related Abuses of Process in Investment Arbitration: Possible Remedies Available to the Arbitral Tribunal’ 26 Arb Int’l 43Google Scholar
Kotuby, C and Sobota, L 2017. General Principles of Law and International Due Process (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Jennings, R and Watts, A (eds) 1992. Oppenheim’s International Law, 9th edn (Oxford University Press), vol 1Google Scholar
Lalive, P and Halonen, L 2011. ‘On the Availability of Counterclaims in Investment Treaty Arbitration’ II Czech YBIL 141Google Scholar
Lauterpacht, H 1933. The Function of Law in the International Community (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Lixinski, L 2015. ‘The Right to a Competent Judge: Selecting, Training and Assigning International Criminal Judges’, in Savarian, A, Fontanelli, F, Baker, R and Tsevelekos, V (eds), Procedural Fairness in International Courts and Tribunals (London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law)Google Scholar
Luttrell, S 2016. ‘Testing the ICSID Framework for Arbitrator Challenges’ 31 ICSID Rev – FILJ 597Google Scholar
Mackenzie, R, Malleson, K, Martin, P and Sands, P 2010. Selecting International Judges: Principle, Process and Politics (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Malmström, C (European Commissioner for Trade) 2017. ‘Reforming Investment Dispute Settlement’ (27 February), http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/february/tradoc_155393.pdfGoogle Scholar
Mani, V S 1980. International Adjudication: Procedural Aspects (The Hague, London and Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff)Google Scholar
Mbengue, M M and Schacherer, S 2018. ‘Africa and the Rethinking of International Investment Law: About the Elaboration of the Pan-African Investment Code’, in Roberts, A, Stephan, P B, Verdier, P-H and Versteeg, M (eds), Comparative International Law (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
McLachlan, C, Shore, L and Weiniger, M 2017. International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Mikhailovich Khodykin, R, Mulcahy, C and Martin Fletcher, N H 2019. A Guide to the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Moseley, S E 2019. ‘Disclosing Third-Party Funding in International Investment Arbitration’ 97 Texas LR 1181Google Scholar
Onyema, E 2019. ‘African Participation in the ICSID System: Appointment and Disqualification of Arbitrators’ 34 ICSID Rev – FILJ 365Google Scholar
Parlett, K 2011. The Individual in the International Legal System: Continuity and Change in International Law (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Paulsson, J 2013. The Idea of Arbitration (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Pellet, A 2012. ‘Judicial Settlement of International Disputes’, in Wolfrum, R (ed), Max Planck Encyclopaedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Polanco, R 2019. The Return of the Home State to Investor–State Disputes: Bringing Back Diplomatic Protection? (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Poudret, J-F and Besson, S 2007. Comparative Law of International Commercial Arbitration, 2nd edn, trans S Berti and A Ponti (London: Sweet & Maxwell)Google Scholar
Poulsen, L N S 2016. ‘States as Foreign Investors: Diplomatic Disputes and Legal Fictions’ 31 ICSID Rev – FILJ 12Google Scholar
Puig, S and Shaffer, G 2018. ‘Imperfect Alternatives: Institutional Choice and the Reform of Investment Law’ 112 AJIL 361Google Scholar
Ramesh, S 2020. ‘Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration: Ownership of the Claim, Consequences for Costs Orders, and Regulation’ 36 Arb Int’l 275Google Scholar
Reed, L 2017. ‘Ab(use) of Due Process: Sword vs Shield’ 33 Arb Int’l 361Google Scholar
Reinisch, A 2017. ‘The European Union and Investor–State Dispute Settlement: From Investor–State Arbitration to a Permanent Investment Court’, in de Mestral, A (ed), Second Thoughts: Investor–State Arbitration between Developed Democracies (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press)Google Scholar
Reinisch, A and Knahr, C 2008. ‘From the United Nations Administrative Tribunal to the United Nations Appeals Tribunal – Reform of the Administration of Justice System within the United Nations’ 12 Max Planck UNYB 447Google Scholar
Reinisch, A and Knahr, C 2007. ‘Transparency versus Confidentiality in International Investment Arbitration – The Biwater Gauff Compromise’ 6 LPICT 97Google Scholar
Riffel, C 2020. ‘Does Investor–State Dispute Settlement Discriminate against Nationals?’ 21 German LJ 197Google Scholar
Roberts, A 2018. ‘Incremental, Systemic, and Paradigmatic Reform of Investor–State Arbitration’ 112 AJIL 410Google Scholar
Sauvant, K P 2019. ‘An Advisory Centre on International Investment Law: Key Features’ (10 September) Academic Forum on ISDS Concept Paper 2019/14Google Scholar
Sarvarian, A, Fontanelli, F, Baker, R and Tzevelekos, V 2015. Procedural Fairness in International Courts and Tribunals (London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law)Google Scholar
Schabas, W 2015. The European Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Schneiderman, D 2017. ‘Listening to Investors (and Others): Audi Alteram Partem and the Future of International Investment Law’, in de Mestral, A (ed), Second Thoughts: Investor State Arbitration between Developed Democracies (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press)Google Scholar
Schreuer, C, Malintoppi, L, Reinisch, A and Sinclair, A 2009. The ICSID Convention: A Commentary, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
Schwebel, S M 2016. ‘The Proposals of the European Commission for Investment Protection and an Investment Court System’ (17 May), http://isdsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/05/THEPROPOSALSOFTHEEUROPEANCOMMISSION.pdfGoogle Scholar
Schwebel, S M 1999. ‘National Judges and Judges Ad Hoc of the International Court of Justice’ 48 ICLQ 889Google Scholar
Schwieder, R W 2018. ‘Legal Aid and Investment Treaty Disputes: Lessons Learned from the Advisory Centre on WTO Law and Investment Experiences’ 19 JWIT 628Google Scholar
Semertzi, A 2014. ‘The Preclusion of Direct Effect in the Recently Concluded EU Free Trade Agreements’ 51 CMLR 1125Google Scholar
Sharpe, J K and Jacob, M 2018. ‘Counterclaims and State Claims’, in Beharry, C L (ed), Contemporary and Emerging Issues on the Law of Damages and Valuation in International Investment Arbitration (Leiden: Brill Nijhoff)Google Scholar
Shaw Kern, J 2019. ‘Investor Responsibility as Familiar Frontier’ 113 AJIL Unbound 28Google Scholar
Sheppard, A 2016. ‘The Approach of Investment Treaty Tribunals to Evidentiary Privileges’ 31 ICSID Rev – FILJ 670Google Scholar
Sourgens, F G, Duggal, K and Laird, I A, 2018. Evidence in International Investment Arbitration (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Steingruber, A 2021. ‘Counterclaims: A Critical Analysis of Article 6 of the 2019 The Hague Resolution of the Institut de Droit International on the “Equality of Parties before International Investment Tribunals”’ 41 ICSID Rev – FILJ, doi: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaa038Google Scholar
Stern, B 2009. ‘Are Some Issues Too Political to Be Arbitrable?’ 24 ICSID Rev – FILJ 90Google Scholar
Stern, B 2005. ‘The Intervention of Private Entities and States as “Friends of the Court” in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings’, in Macrory, P F J, Appleton, A E and Plummer, M G (eds), The World Trade Organization: Legal, Economic and Political Analysis (New York: Springer), vol 1Google Scholar
Stern, B 2002. ‘L’entrée de la société civile dans l’arbitrage entre Etat et investisseur’ 2 Revue de l’Arbitrage 329Google Scholar
Strong, S I 2013. Class, Mass and Collective Arbitration in National and International Law (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Szczudlik, K 2018. ‘Effective Management of Mass Claims Arbitration: What We Could Learn from International Tribunals’, in Akbaba, M and Capurro, G (eds), International Challenges in Investment Arbitration (New York: Routledge)Google Scholar
Toral, M and Schultz, T 2010. ‘The State, a Perpetual Respondent in Investment Arbitration?’, in Waibel, M, Kaushal, A, Chung, K-H and Balchin, C (eds), The Backlash against Investment Arbitration: Perceptions and Reality (London: Kluwer)Google Scholar
Treves, R T 2015. ‘Equality of Arms and Inequality of Resources’, in Savarian, A, Fontanelli, F, Baker, R and Tzevelekos, V (eds), Procedural Fairness in International Courts and Tribunals (London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law)Google Scholar
Ulmer, N 2010. ‘The Cost Conundrum’ 26 Arb Int’L 221Google Scholar
van Houtte, H and McAsey, B 2012. ‘Case Comment, Abaclat and Ors v Argentina: ICSID, the BIT and Mass Claims’ 27 ICSID Rev – FILJ 231Google Scholar
Vidal-Léon, C 2014. ‘Inequality of the Parties before the International Court of Justice: Reflections on the Appellate Jurisdiction over ILOAT Judgments’ 5 JIDS 406Google Scholar
Wälde, T 2010. ‘Chapter 8: “Equality of Arms” in Investment Arbitration: Procedural Challenges’, in Yannaca-Small, K (ed), Arbitration under International Investment Agreements: A Guide to the Key Issues (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
Wälde, T 2007. ‘Introduction: International Investment Law Emerging from the Dynamics of Direct Investor–State Arbitration’, in Kahn, P and Wälde, T (eds), New Aspects of International Investment Law, Hague Academy of International Law (Leiden and Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff)Google Scholar
Zimermann, A, Oellers-Frahm, K, Tomuschat, C and Tams, C J (eds) 2012. The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

American Law Institute (ALI)/UNIDROIT 2004. Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure (Cambridge University Press)Google Scholar
European Commission (EC) 2015. ‘Report: Online Public Consultation on Investment Protection and Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement (TTIP)’ (13 January), http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_153044.pdfGoogle Scholar
EC and Government of Canada 2017. ‘The Case for Creating a Multilateral Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism’ (Informal ministerial meeting, World Economic Forum, Davos, 20 January)Google Scholar
European Union Council 2018. ‘Negotiating Directives for a Convention Establishing a Multilateral Court for the Settlement of Investment Disputes’ (20 March), 12981/17 ADD 1 DCL 1Google Scholar
France 2015. ‘Towards a New Way to Settle Disputes between States and Investors’ (May), www.diplomatie.gouv.frGoogle Scholar
Geneva Center for International Dispute Settlement (CIDS) 2017. ‘Supplemental Report: The Composition of a Multilateral Investment Court and of an Appeal Mechanism for Investment Awards’ (15 November)Google Scholar
Geneva Center for International Dispute Settlement (CIDS) (G Kaufmann-Kohler and M Potestà) 2016. ‘Can the Mauritius Convention Serve as a Model for the Reform of Investor-State Arbitration in Connection with the Introduction of a Permanent Investment Tribunal or an Appeal Mechanism?’Google Scholar
Institut de Droit International 2013. ‘Legal Aspects of Recourse to Arbitration by an Investor against the Authorities of the Host State under Inter-State Treaties’ (Eighteenth Commission, A Giardina Rapporteur) 75 Annuaire 1, (2014) 29 ICSID Rev – FILJ 701Google Scholar
Institut de Droit International 2011. ‘The Position of the International Judge’ (Sixth Commission, G Guillaume Rapporteur) 74 Annuaire 3Google Scholar
Institut de Droit International 1989. ‘Arbitration between States, State Enterprises, or State Entities and Foreign Enterprises’ 63 Annuaire Pt I, 31–204 (preparatory work), Pt II, 121–2 (deliberations of the Institut), 324–31 (Resolution as adopted)Google Scholar
International Bar Association (IBA) 2014. ‘IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration’ (rev edn, adopted 23 October)Google Scholar
International Bar Association (IBA) 2010. ‘Commentary on the Revised Text of the 2010 IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration’, www.ibanet.org/MediaHandler?id=DD240932-0E08-40D4-9866-309A635487C0Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2020a. ‘Updated Backgrounder on Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (28 February)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2020b. ‘Working Paper #4: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (28 February)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2019a. ‘Working Paper #2: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (March)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2019b. ‘Working Paper #3: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (August)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2018a. ‘Proposals for the Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (2 August)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2018b. ‘Schedule 8: Transparency – Access to Documents, Access to Hearings, and Non-Disputing Party Participating in ICSID Proceedings’, in ‘Working Paper #1: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’, vol 3 (2 August)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 2018c. ‘Schedule 9: Addressing Time and Cost in ICSID Arbitration’, in ‘Working Paper #1: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’, vol 3 (2 August)Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 1969. ‘Documents Concerning the Origin and the Formulation of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States’Google Scholar
International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 1965. ‘Report of the Executive Directors on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States’Google Scholar
ICSID Secretariat 2018. ‘Working Paper #1: Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules’ (3 vols, 2 August)Google Scholar
ICSID/UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) 2020. ‘Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor–State Dispute Settlement’ (1 May), https://uncitral.un.org/en/codeofconductGoogle Scholar
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) 2012. ICC Commission Report, ‘States, State Entities and ICC Arbitration’Google Scholar
International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) 2018. ‘Report of the ICCA-Queen Mary Task Force on Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration’ (ICCA Report No 4, April)Google Scholar
International Law Association (ILA) 2005. Study Group on the Practice and Procedure of International Courts and Tribunals, ‘Burgh House Principles on the Independence of the International Judiciary’ (P Sands and C McLachlan, Co-Chairs) 4 LPICT 247Google Scholar
International Law Commission (ILC) 1955. ‘Commentary on the Draft Convention on Arbitral Procedure Adopted by the International Law Commission at Its Fifth Session, Prepared by the Secretariat’, UN Doc A/CN.4/92Google Scholar
NAFTA Free Trade Commission (FTC) 2004. ‘Statement of the Free Trade Commission on Non-Disputing Party Participation’, www.sice.oas.org/tpd/nafta/commission/nondispute_e.pdfGoogle Scholar
UNCITRAL 2020a. ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Resumed Thirty-Eighth Session (Vienna, 20–24 January 2020)’, UN Doc A/CN.9/1004/Add.1Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2020b. ‘Selection and Appointment of ISDS Tribunal Members: Note by the Secretariat’ (Draft working papers for comment), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WPGoogle Scholar
UNCITRAL 2020c. ‘Mulitple Proceedings and Counterclaims: Note by the Secretariat’ (22 January), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.193Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2019a. ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Eighth Session (Vienna, 14–18 October 2019)’, UN Doc A/CN.9/1004Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2019b. ‘Background Information on a Code of Conduct: Note by the Secretariat’ (31 July), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.167Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2019c. ‘Advisory Centre: Note by the Secretariat’ (25 July), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.168Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2019d. ‘Third-Party Funding – Possible Solutions: Note by the Secretariat’ (2 August), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.172Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2018. ‘Report of Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the Work of Its Thirty-Fifth Session’ (14 May), UN Doc A/CN.9/935Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2017a. ‘Possible Future Work in the Field of Dispute Settlement: Reforms of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Note by the Secretariat’ (20 April), UN Doc A/CN.9/917Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2017b. ‘Note by the Secretariat: Working Group III (Investor–State Dispute Settlement Reform) Thirty-Fourth Session’ (18 September), UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.142Google Scholar
UNCITRAL 2006. (J Paulson and G Petrochilos) ‘Revision of the UNCITRAL Rules: A Report’Google Scholar
UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) 2020. ‘IIA Issues Note No 2’ (July), UN Doc UNCTAD/DIAE/PCB/INF/2020/6Google Scholar
UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) 2013. ‘Reform of Investor–State Dispute Settlement: In Search of a Road-Map’ (26 June)Google Scholar
UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) 2007. ‘General Comment No 32 Article 14: Right to Equality before Courts and Tribunals and to a Fair Trial’ (23 August), UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/32Google Scholar
UN Secretary-General 2012. ‘Delivering Justice: Programme of Action to Strengthen the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels’ (16 March), UN Doc A/66/749Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) 2017. ‘Deepening Africa’s Integration in the Global Economy through Trade and Investment Facilitation for Development: Abuja Statement’ (7 November), Doc No WT/MIN(17)/4 WT/GC/186Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Select Bibliography
  • Campbell McLachlan, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Book: The Institute of International Law's Resolution on the Equality of Parties Before International Investment Tribunals
  • Online publication: 28 October 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009047586.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Select Bibliography
  • Campbell McLachlan, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Book: The Institute of International Law's Resolution on the Equality of Parties Before International Investment Tribunals
  • Online publication: 28 October 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009047586.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Select Bibliography
  • Campbell McLachlan, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Book: The Institute of International Law's Resolution on the Equality of Parties Before International Investment Tribunals
  • Online publication: 28 October 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009047586.005
Available formats
×