As Young ICCA continues to grow and expand (now with over 800 members!), one of our goals is to use the Young ICCA blog as a means of providing regular posts concerning current events and topics in the arbitration world. Spearheaded by Young ICCA Co-Chair, Tim Foden, posts will include questions which we ask Young ICCA members to discuss in the ‘comments’ section. We look forward to your participation!
A new journal called the “European International Arbitration Review” is seeking case note submissions . The Review is published twice yearly around May and November. The Case Notes section constitutes a panorama of state court case law from around Europe touching upon or in relation to arbitration. The Review’s editors intend to procure as many case notes as possible for each edition of the Review. It intends to publish submissions from lawyers on case law developments in North, South, East and West Europe, as well as supranational/international case law developments (e.g., Court of Justice of the European Union, European Court of Human Rights) from time to time, to ensure as wide and balanced coverage as possible. Typically, there shall be 4-5 case notes per issue, ideally one report from each geographic area and, where appropriate, from the supranational/international arena as well.
The inaugural issue of the Review examined State support for arbitration (“arbitration-friendly” legislation, court judgments, etc.) and how this contributed to the creation of a self-contained system of international arbitration. In the November 2012 edition, the editors wish to examine the flip-side, namely, attacks by States on the scope/sphere/nature of arbitration through court judgments or legal proceedings before State courts in the interests of protecting higher systemic interests, such as ensuring the observance of fundamental principles of due process, etc (national level and EU level) or the uniform application of EU law, or for other reasons.
Young ICCA members interested to contribute to the second issue of the European International Arbitration Review, are invited to submit a case note touching upon or in relation to this issue. If this is of interest to you please submit in the first instance an abstract of 250-400 words in length by 15 September 2012 to editors Tim Foden (at Timothy.Foden@AllenOvery.com) and John Gaffney (at JGaffney@KSLAW.com), following which the editors may invite you to submit a full draft case note by 1 October 2012.
Wamiq Chowdhury has won the Young ICCA-University of Miami scholarship competition. The announcement was made by Ms. Judy Freedberg of the University of Miami at the closing ceremony of the ICCA Congress on 13 June in Singapore. The scholarship entitles Mr. Chowdhury to a fully-paid place in the year-long LLM programme in international arbitration, taught by leading international arbitrators including ICCA Governing Board President and Member, Jan Paulsson and Albert Jan van den Berg.
Mr. Chowdhury’s winning essay entitled “Recent Developments in ICSID Arbitration: Too Early to Jump Ship”, will be published on the Young ICCA blog. Mr. Chowdhury is a recent JD graduate of the NYU School of Law where he focused on international arbitration, participated regularly in NYU’s Arbitration Forums, and was a member of the University’s multiple award-winning Foreign Direct Investment Moot team. Marike Paulsson, Young ICCA co-chair says “we are delighted to offer a young arbitration specialist the opportunity to get insights from the leading arbitration specialist- this is a big step towards opening the doors of international arbitration”!
By Wamiq Chowdhury
This essay was written as a response to two prompts provided for the Miami/Young ICCA Scholarship Competition. The two prompts were: “Recent developments in ICSID arbitration – time to think about alternatives?” and “How Do We Design for Legitimacy?”
The International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) is experiencing growing pains. As recourse to ICSID arbitration in order to resolve foreign investment disputes becomes more common, ICSID jurisprudence is beginning to raise concerns on a number of fronts about the legitimacy of the system, and whether it will remain a viable method of settling investment disputes in the long term. This paper begins by exploring ICSID’s design, why legitimacy matters to ICSID, and what it means to say that ICSID’s legitimacy is in doubt. It then examines a number of different developments that are presenting challenges to ICSID’s legitimacy: inadequately reasoned awards, inconsistencies in awards and annulment decisions, and potentially problematic interpretive practices of ICSID tribunals with regards to essential security clauses, umbrella clauses, and treaty shopping. After assessing the challenges posed by these developments, the paper urges caution in determining the extent to which ICSID’s legitimacy has been affected by said developments. It argues that the challenges may seem greater at present than they in fact are. It also proposes some less far-reaching solutions for enhancing ICSID’s legitimacy than are being discussed in the investment arbitration community at present.
This case note is limited to an attempt to answer the question whether the case Ciments Français v. Sibirskij Cement might be “[a] Russian Putrabali?”