Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Structure of Arbitrators and Its Implications towards ICSID Mechanism: An Empirical Analys ...

Structure of Arbitrators and Its Implications towards ICSID Mechanism: An Empirical Analys ... INTRODUCTION Distinguished Thomas W. Wälde, in his speech given in 2004, insightfully provided his fundamental judgment towards the current international investment law: modern international investment law develops now mainly out of cases, and less out of treaties (Italics added)1. If Wälde's judgment is sound - I personally agree on this judgment, it can be inferred from this judgment that much more attention than before should be paid to various roles involved in "cases", and the arbitrators who are responsible for the presiding arbitration proceedings are undisputedly the foremost ones,.2 The author, in this article, wants to discuss the significance of arbitrators under the Mechanism of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (hereinafter "Washington Convention"). In Part One, the author briefly analyzes the special characteristics of ICSID mechanism and IcsiD arbitrators, which are compared with commercial arbitration. In Part Two, the author discusses the participation of nationals from developing states and developed states respectively into ICSID mechanism by examining empirically the status quo of the nationality structure of ICSID arbitrators during the period of 1996-2007 and finds that serious imbalance http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of World Investment and Trade Brill

Structure of Arbitrators and Its Implications towards ICSID Mechanism: An Empirical Analys ...

Journal of World Investment and Trade , Volume 9 (3): 17 – Jan 1, 2008

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/structure-of-arbitrators-and-its-implications-towards-icsid-mechanism-1e0YW20A0g

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1660-7112
eISSN
2211-9000
DOI
10.1163/221190008X00052
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Distinguished Thomas W. Wälde, in his speech given in 2004, insightfully provided his fundamental judgment towards the current international investment law: modern international investment law develops now mainly out of cases, and less out of treaties (Italics added)1. If Wälde's judgment is sound - I personally agree on this judgment, it can be inferred from this judgment that much more attention than before should be paid to various roles involved in "cases", and the arbitrators who are responsible for the presiding arbitration proceedings are undisputedly the foremost ones,.2 The author, in this article, wants to discuss the significance of arbitrators under the Mechanism of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (hereinafter "Washington Convention"). In Part One, the author briefly analyzes the special characteristics of ICSID mechanism and IcsiD arbitrators, which are compared with commercial arbitration. In Part Two, the author discusses the participation of nationals from developing states and developed states respectively into ICSID mechanism by examining empirically the status quo of the nationality structure of ICSID arbitrators during the period of 1996-2007 and finds that serious imbalance

Journal

Journal of World Investment and TradeBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2008

There are no references for this article.