International Arbitration

International Arbitration Information by Aceris Law LLC

  • International Arbitration Resources
  • Search Engine
  • Model Request for Arbitration
  • Model Answer to Request for Arbitration
  • Find International Arbitrators
  • Blog
  • Arbitration Laws
  • Arbitration Lawyers
You are here: Home / Archives for Investor State Dispute Settlement

Intra-EU Investment Arbitration: Impact of EU Member States’ Declarations in the Wake of Achmea

06/05/2019 by International Arbitration

Impact of EU Member States’ Declarations in the Wake of Achmea

In Achmea,[1] the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was asked to assess the compatibility of the dispute resolution clause contained in the Netherlands-Slovak Republic BIT with EU law. In March 2018, the CJEU held that the clause was incompatible based on the threat posed to the constitutional structure and autonomy of the […]

Filed Under: Bilateral Investment Treaty, Enforcement of Arbitration Award, Investor State Dispute Settlement

Time Limitations and Stale Claims in Investment Arbitration

18/03/2019 by International Arbitration

statute-of-limitation in Investment Arbitration

Investment arbitration sometimes deals with legal issues that are particularly well-rooted in national laws, whereas their application at the international level is less evident. One of these issues revolves around the concept of time limitations. In fact, host States of investment might build their defence based on this concept, arguing that investors’ claims are stale, […]

Filed Under: Arbitration Rules, Bilateral Investment Treaty, Investor State Dispute Settlement

Fork in the Road Provision in Investment Arbitration

16/02/2019 by International Arbitration

Fork in the Road Provision in Investment Arbitration

The fork in the road provision, or Electa una via, non datur recursus ad alteram (English translation: “when one way has been chosen, no recourse is given to another”[1]), belongs to a category of jurisdiction-declining provisions[2] marking “the relationship between international arbitration and adjudication by domestic courts.”[3] However, it should be noted that certain tribunals have […]

Filed Under: Arbitration Rules, Bilateral Investment Treaty, Investor State Dispute Settlement

ICC as Appointing Authority in UNCITRAL or Other Ad Hoc Arbitration Proceedings (2018 ICC Rules)

22/01/2019 by International Arbitration

ICC as Appointing Authority in UNCITRAL or Other Ad Hoc Arbitration Proceedings

International arbitration is governed by a cornerstone principle, the principle of consent. This means that parties are free to include, by mutual consent, an arbitration agreement in their contract. By the same token, they can organize such arbitration proceedings by choosing either an ad hoc arbitration or an arbitration administered by an institution. Nonetheless, the […]

Filed Under: ICC Arbitration, ICSID Arbitration, Investor State Dispute Settlement

Final Version of the Netherlands Model BIT Released

01/01/2019 by International Arbitration

Final Netherlands BIT

Previously, we analysed the main features of the 2018 Draft Netherlands Model BIT and concluded that the instrument could mark a new era in investment arbitration in the Netherlands. The Draft was open to consultation until 18 June 2017. The finalized text was adopted and released on 19 October 2018. The final version of the […]

Filed Under: Bilateral Investment Treaty, Investor State Dispute Settlement, Netherlands Arbitration

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • …
  • 24
  • Next Page »

Search Arbitration Information

Key Changes in the 2026 ICC Arbitration Rules

Panama Canal Ports Dispute: Key Lessons for Foreign Investors

Can Misconduct in Arbitration Invalidate an Award?

Indus Waters Treaty Arbitration: Can India Put the Treaty in Abeyance?

The CEPANI 2026 Arbitration Rules

UNCITRAL SPEDR Adjudication and the Construction Industry

Environmental Liability in International Arbitration: Niko Resources and the Limits of Recoverable Loss

When a Termination Carve-Out Does Not Bar Arbitration: Lessons from Refinería Madero v. Pemex Tri

Could Iran Bring the U.S. to Arbitration Over Its Iran Strikes? A 1981 Agreement Says Yes

Third-Party Funding and Confidentiality in Investment Arbitration: Kappes v. Guatemala

Investment Arbitration in Mexico: Why an Over USD 2.1 Billion Claim Failed

New 2026 ICC Arbitration Rules

Arbitration in Próspera: An Arbitration Utopia?

Timing of Jurisdictional Objections in Arbitration

© 2012-2026 · IA