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
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 8 - The Consolidation of Proceedings and Mass Claims in International Investment Law and Arbitration

  • Lukas Vanhonnaeker, McGill University, Montréal
  • Book:
    Shareholders' Claims for Reflective Loss in International Investment Law
    Published online:
    13 July 2020
    Print publication:
    16 July 2020, pp 283-336

  • Summary

    This chapter addresses a second set of answers to parallel proceedings in the context of shareholders’ claims for reflective loss, the risks of double recovery, and the inconsistent decisions they lead to: a broader use of the mechanism of consolidation and mass claims in international investment arbitration. First, the mechanism of consolidation is analyzed in the context of investment arbitration by focusing on treaty practice and investment case law. This chapter explains why this mechanism can be useful to reduce instances of parallel proceedings and why it is particularly well suited in the context of such proceedings created by shareholders’ claims for reflective loss. The same analysis is undertaken with respect to the practice of mass claims in investment arbitration, and for similar reasons as with respect to consolidation, this chapter suggests a broader use of such multiparty proceedings in investment arbitration, especially with respect to shareholders’ claims for reflective loss.