Investor Presentaiton

70 INVESTOR-STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: A SEQUEL discretion to those arbitrators to tailor proceedings to suit the needs of the individual dispute. The same BIT will provide the applicable law, and the general conduct of the arbitration in terms of procedural steps will likely be similar. However, as summarized in Table 3, there are certain distinctions that can be quite important depending on the circumstances of a specific case. Perhaps most importantly, the ICSID has been designed as a self-contained and delocalized system with automatic enforcement of arbitral awards, while the UNCITRAL rules similar to other rules and venues created for arbitrating commercial disputes between private parties have more links to national laws and domestic court systems, particularly with respect to judicial assistance to arbitration, review and set-aside arbitral awards, and their recognition and enforcement. Governments need to be aware of the particular features of both the ICSID and UNCITRAL Rules in order to decide whether they wish to include them in their IIAS, as well as to have realistic expectations, to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the rules, and to foresee possible pitfalls and challenges. In an IIA, the contracting parties may also introduce particular rules governing various aspects of the arbitral proceedings, thereby overriding the default provisions of the relevant arbitral rules.65 Table 3. Main distinctions between the ICSID and UNCITRAL arbitration rules Issue Jurisdictional requirements ICSID Convention Imposes additional jurisdictional 65 See sections II.F-II.P. 66 UNCITRAL66 Does not impose additional jurisdictional As noted above, the UNCITRAL Rules were initially adopted in 1976 and revised in 2010. For clarity, the table refers to both editions of the Rules. UNCTAD Series on International Investment Agreements II

View entire presentation