The Role of Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Professor of Law,Shahid Beheshti University

2 Master of International ,Comercial law, Shahid BeheshtiUniversity.

Abstract

Abstract

At the present time in the text of many international contracts in which one party is the State and the other party is a foreign private sector, and known as State contracts, and mainly are investment contracts there exists a condition concerned with arbitration as the means of dispute settlement. Therefore, international arbitration has become the most common process for resolving disputes regarding these contracts. Although basically the main regulations of these arbitrations are the international commercial arbitration rules of institutional and ad hoc arbitrations, some developments have been occurred in these rules in recent years due to the presence of the States. The new establishment of "amicus curiae", which is a phenomenon in the court proceedings in some countries, in the system of investment arbitration has been counted as one of the most important developments of the arbitration system. "Amicus curiae" is a third person, other than the parties, to a lawsuit who has an interest in the decision of the court, and request the court or is requested by the court to file a brief in the action. In this article, thus, it has been tried to introduce this phenomenon and to analyze the role it plays in recent investment arbitrations as well as its function.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Aguas del Tunari, S.A. v. Republic of , Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction, October.21, 2005.
  2. Bellhouse, Jahn & Lavers, Anthony, The Modern Amicus Curiae: A Role in Arbitration?, 23 Civil Justice Quarterly, 2004.
  3. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, Procedural Order No. 5 of 2 Feb 2007.
  4. Bjorklund, Andrea K., The Emerging Civilization of Investment Arbitration, 113th Penn State Law. Review, 2009.
  5. Buckley, Ross P & Blyschak, paul, Guarding the Open Door: Non-party Participation Before The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Faculty of Law, UNSW Law Research Paper No. 2007-33.
  6. Chirichiello, Michaela & Professor F. Gelias, Confidentiality and Public Interest in Mixed International Arbitration, McGill University, Institution of Comparative Law, 2003.
  7. Collins, , Paul M.,  Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
  8. Collins, Jr, Paul M., Interest Group Participation in the United State Supreme Court, Paper Prepared For Delivery At The Symposium On The Role Of Interveners In Public Interest Litigation, University Of Toronto Law School, November 6, 2009.
  9. Fach Gomez, Katia, Rethinking The Role of Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration: How to Draw The Line Favorable for The Public Interest, Fordham International Law Journal, 2012.
  10. Gao, Henry S., Amicus curiae In WTO Dispute Settlement: Theory and Practice, Big Country Small World, China Rights Forum, No.1, 2006
  11. Graham, Camilla, A "How To" Guide To Amicus Curiae & International Investment Arbitration, Advocates for International Development.
  12. Ishikawa, Tomoko, Third Party Participation In Investment Treaty Arbitration,59th Cambridge Journal, 2010.
  13. Kawharu, Amokura, Public Participation & Transparency in Investment Arbitration: Recent Developments and Future Challenges, ANU College Of
  14. Myrvang, Anna, An Illustration of How Traditional Arbitration Is Being Changed By Modern International Investment Law: Investor-State Arbitration Under NAFTA Chapter XI and The Energy Chapter Treaty, Konstanz university (Germany), 2003.
  15. Levine, Eugenia, Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration: The Implications of an Increase in Third-Party Participation, 29th Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2011.
  16. Methanex v. United State of America, Decision of The Tribunal on Petitions from Third Persons to Intervene As Amici Curiae.
  17. Nicholson, Chris & Collins, Jr., Paul M., The Solicitor General’s Amicus Curiae Strategies in The Supreme Court, 36 American Politics Research, 2008.
  18. . Simpson, Reagan wm. & Vasaly, Mary, The Amicus Brief: How to Write It and Use it Effectively, Third Edition, 2010.
  19. Susan D. Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review, Vol.73, 2005.
  20. Statement of the Free Trade Commission On Non-Disputing Party Participation(NAFTA), 2003.
  21. The North Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1994
  22. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138, Report of the Panel , 23 December 1999, WT/DS138/R.
  23. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Decision Of The Tribunal On Petitions For Intervention And Participation As Amici Curiae,
  24. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Mexico’s 1128 Submission on the Amicus Petitions, NAFTA Arbitration, 2001.
  25. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Decision Of The Tribunal On Petitions For Intervention And Participation As Amici Curiae.

Cases:

  1. Ab How (alias Louie Ah How) v. United States
  2. Aguas del Tunari, S.A. v. Republic of , Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction, October.21, 2005.
  3. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No.ARB/05/22.
  4. Methanex v. United State of America (NAFTA Arbitration case)
  5. Piero Foresti v. Republic of South Africa, ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/07/1
  6. Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, S.A., & Vivendi Universal, S.A v. Arg. Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19.
  7. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, NAFTA Arbitration, 2001
  8. United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58, (WTO case)
  9. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138, (WTO case)

 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 27 May 2018
  • Revise Date: 18 February 2019
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics