SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Adalet Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 68

ABUSIVE CONDUCT IN INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION: A FOCUS ON FRIVOLOUS CLAIMS

Uzeyir KARABIYIK
Pages
487–512
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Finally, the efficacy of third-party funding in curtailing frivolous claims is addressed

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The structural deficiencies of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system pave the way for foreign investors’ abusive conduct.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Despite lacking legal merit, frivolous claims can generate damaging consequences for host states.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Finally, the efficacy of third-party funding in curtailing frivolous claims is addressed
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:ISDS · investor-state arbitration · frivolous claims

Abstract

The structural deficiencies of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system pave the way for foreign investors’ abusive conduct. As one of the most frequently faced forms of abusive conduct, the use of frivolous claims has become a growing concern. Despite lacking legal merit, frivolous claims can generate damaging consequences for host states. This article first discusses the characteristics of frivolous claims in ISDS practice through examples from arbitral case law. It subsequently examines the existing tools and mechanisms that can be employed to cope with this phenomenon, focusing primarily on early dismissal mechanisms in institutional rules and investment treaties and security for costs. Finally, the efficacy of third-party funding in curtailing frivolous claims is addressed

🔖

Cite This Article

KARABIYIK, U. (2022). ABUSIVE CONDUCT IN INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION: A FOCUS ON FRIVOLOUS CLAIMS. Adalet Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 68, 487–512. https://ajindex.com/articles/428059

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Brekoulakis S/Rogers C, “Third-Party Financing in ISDS: A Framework for Understanding Practice and Policy”, Academic Forum on ISDS Concept Paper 2019/11, 31 July 2019.
  2. Chen D L, Can Markets Stimulate Rights? On the Alienability of Legal Claims, 2015, 46 RAND J. of Economics 23, 25, 33. Chen T-F, Deterring Frivolous Challenges in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, 8 Contemp. Asia Arb. J. 61, 2015. Dodge K/Barnett J/Macedo L/Kulig P, Third-Party Funding and Reform of the ICSID Arbitration Rules, 3/2021, Revista Română De Arbitraj. Gaillard E, Abuse of Process in International Arbitration, ICSID Review, 2017.
  3. Garcia F J, Third-Party Funding as Exploitation of the Investment Treaty System, 59 B.C. L. Rev. 2911, 2018. Guven B/Johnson L, The Policy Implications of Third-Party Funding in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment, CCSI Working Paper, 2019.
  4. Karabıyık M Ü, Investor Misconduct in International Investment Arbitration: Can the Unclean Hands Doctrine be a Cure?, Year: 12, Issue: 22, July 2021, Law & Justice Review. Karabıyık M Ü, Remedying Investor Misconduct in Investor-State Arbitration through Third Party Funding, Volume 1 Issue 2, 15-25, 2021, Indian Review of International Arbitration. Markert L, Improving Efficiency in Investment Arbitration, 4 Contemp. Asia Arb. J. 215, 2011. Polasek M/Quero C E S, 'Chapter 21: Security for Costs: Overview of ICSID Case Law', in Sherlin Tung, Fabricio Fortese, et al. (eds), Finances in International Arbitration: Liber Amicorum Patricia Shaughnessy, © Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2019.
  5. Polonskaya K, Frivolous Claims in the International Investment Regime: How CETA Expands the Range of Frivolous Claims That May Be Curtailed in an Expedient Fashion, 17 Asper Rev. Int'l Bus. & Trade L. 1, 2017. Román B M C, “Third-party Litigation Funding: Investing in Arbitration', Spain Arbitration Review, Volume 2012, Issue 13, Revista del Club Español del Arbitraje, © Club Español del Arbitraje; Wolters Kluwer España 2012. Yeo A/Yen K S, Objection of Manifest Lack of Legal Merit of Claims: Arbitration Rule 41(5), The Investment Treaty Arbitration Review, 4th Edition, 2019.
  6. Brandes Investment Partners, LP v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/3, Decision on the Respondent's Objection Under Rule 41(5) of the ICSID Arbitration Rules, 2 February 2009
  7. Emmis et al. v. Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/2, Decision on Respondent's Objection Under ICSID Arbitration