Cantitate/Preț
Produs
Total produse
Vezi coșul
The Independence and Impartiality of ICSID Arbitrators: Current Case Law, Alternative Approaches, and Improvement Suggestions de Maria Nicole Cleis

The Independence and Impartiality of ICSID Arbitrators: Current Case Law, Alternative Approaches, and Improvement Suggestions: Nijhoff International Investment Law Series, cartea 8

Autor Maria Nicole Cleis
en Limba Engleză Hardback – 20 iun 2017
The legitimacy of investor-State arbitration is a much-debated topic, with arbitrators’ independence and impartiality being one of the core concerns. In The Independence and Impartiality of ICSID Arbitrators, Maria Nicole Cleis explores how unbiased decision-making is ensured under the ICSID Convention. Juxtaposing existing disqualification decisions in the ICSID system against corresponding requirements in related dispute settlement systems, the book convincingly argues that the current approach to disqualification requests against ICSID arbitrators is too exacting in light of the high stakes of investor-State disputes. The author’s nuanced analysis of the status quo is followed by novel suggestions for reforms (including a proposal for ICSID-specific guidelines on conflict of interest), making the book a valuable source of ideas on constructive paths forward.
Citește tot Restrânge

Din seria Nijhoff International Investment Law Series

Preț: 68206 lei

Preț vechi: 83178 lei
-18% Nou

Puncte Express: 1023
Preț estimativ în valută:
13056€ • 13705$ • 10785£

Carte indisponibilă temporar


Wish list
Gift list
Am citit!
Adaugă în listă
Doresc să fiu notificat când acest titlu va fi disponibil:
Trimite
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76

Specificații

ISBN-13: 9789004341470
ISBN-10: 9004341471
Pagini: 292
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Nijhoff International Investment Law Series

Cuprins

b>Acknowledgments
List of Illustrations
List of Abbreviations

Introduction
Structure of the Book

1 Independence and Impartiality in the icsid Convention and Arbitration Rules
1 Legal Framework and Drafting History
1.1The Requirement of Independence and Impartiality
1.2The Disqualification of Arbitrators
1.3Arbitrators’ Disclosure Obligation
2 Delimiting Independence and Impartiality in a System of Party-appointments
2.1The Notions of Independence and Impartiality
2.2Party-appointments and Independence and Impartiality

2 Disqualification Decisions under the icsid Convention and Arbitration Rules
1 Formally Inconsistent Interpretations of the Disqualification Threshold
1.1Requirement of Strict Proof under Amco Asia
1.2Requirement of Reasonable Doubts under Vivendi and sgs
1.3Inconsistency of the Disqualification Threshold in Subsequent Decisions
A Challenge Decisions Applying the Amco Asia Standard
B Challenge Decisions Applying the Vivendi Standard
C Challenge Decisions Referring to Both Standards
1.4Conclusion
2 Application of the Standard to Specific Categories of Alleged Conflict
2.1Behavior in Current Proceeding
2.2Familiarity with Another Participant in the Proceeding
A Previous Contacts with a Party or Counsel
B Role Switching between an Arbitrator and Counsel
C Repeat Appointments
2.3Familiarity with the Subject-matter of the Proceeding
2.4Connection to an Adverse Third Party
2.5Conclusion
3 Factors Underlying the Prevalent Dismissal of Arbitrator Challenges

3 Alternative Standards of Independence and Impartiality
1 International Adjudication
1.1Relevance
1.2The International Court of Justice
A Independence and Impartiality Requirements
B Removal of icj Judges
C Case Law
1.3Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization
A Independence and Impartiality Requirements
B Challenge of Panelists and Members of the Appellate Body
1.4Contextualization and Conclusion
2 International Commercial Arbitration
2.1Relevance
2.2The uncitral Arbitration Rules
A Behavior in Current Proceeding
B Familiarity with Another Participant in the Proceeding
C Familiarity with the Subject-Matter of the Proceeding
D Connection to an Adverse Third Party
2.3The scc Arbitration Rules
A Familiarity with Another Participant in the Proceeding
B Familiarity with the Subject-Matter of the Proceeding
2.4The icc Arbitration Rules
A Familiarity with Another Participant in the Proceeding
B Familiarity with the Subject-Matter of the Proceeding
C Connection to an Adverse Third Party
2.5Contextualization and Conclusion
3 Self-regulatory Codes of Conduct for Arbitrators
3.1Relevance
3.2The iba Guidelines
A General Standards
B Application Lists
C Case Law
3.3Contextualization and Conclusion
4Sui Generis Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
4.1Relevance
4.2The Iran–United States Claims Tribunal
4.3The Permanent Court of Arbitration
4.4Contextualization and Conclusion
5 Summary Analysis
5.1Basic Consensus
5.2Prevalent Threshold
5.3Effect of the Threshold on the Outcome
A Main Discrepancies
B Main Similarities
C Gaps in the Case Law

4 Analysis of Existing Reform Proposals
1 Abolishment or Modification of the System of Party-appointments
1.1Appointment by a Neutral Body
1.2Party-appointment from a Roster
2 Prohibition of Dual Functions
2.1Complete Prohibition
2.2Temporary Prohibition and Vesting Period
2.3Disinvolvement upon Challenge?
3 Clarification of the Threshold for Arbitrator Challenges
3.1Excessive Rigor of the Strict Proof Threshold
3.2Adequacy of the Justifiable Doubts Threshold
4 The Investment Court System Proposed by the European Union
4.1Investor-state Dispute Settlement under ceta
4.2Investor-state Dispute Settlement under ttip
4.3ics – Panacea or Chimera?

5 Improvement Suggestions
1 Institutional Reforms
1.1Appointment of the Chairperson from a Roster
1.2Institutional Confirmation of Party-appointed Arbitrators
1.3Institutional Jurisdiction for Arbitrator Challenges
2 Guidance on the Interpretation of a Justifiable Doubts Threshold
2.1Compulsory Grounds for Disqualification
2.2Potential Grounds for Disqualification
A Reversal of the Burden of Proof
B Burden of Proof on the Challenging Party
2.3No Grounds for Disqualification
2.4Proposal for icsid-specific Guidelines on Conflict of Interest
A Incompatibilities
B Potential Grounds for Disqualification
C Unproblematic Circumstances
3 Implementation of Suggested Reforms

Summary
Bibliography
Legal Sources
ICSID Cases
uncitral Cases

Notă biografică

Maria Nicole Cleis, Ph.D. (2016, University of Basel), LL.M. (2014, Harvard Law School), Attorney-at-law, is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Basel, and a lecturer in International Investment Law at the University of Neuchâtel.