Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy pp 1–28Cite as

Model Instrument for Management of Investment Disputes

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

  • 298 Accesses

Abstract

If not timely addressed, conflicts between foreign investors and host States may escalate into full disputes. Those disputes often involve essential public policies, attract great scrutiny of the media, and implicate claims for substantial monetary damages as well as risks of reputational damage and of losing investments. Independently of the ongoing discussions on potential reforms to the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system, effective conflict prevention and dispute management mechanisms are and will still be fundamental. The Model Instrument on Management of Investment Disputes seeks to provide government officials with a comprehensive overview of the legal, institutional, and practical issues that need to be considered for the effective management of investment disputes (including the use of negotiation, mediation, and conciliation). The Model Instrument could be voluntarily used by governments as a reference or guide to develop or update their framework for managing investment disputes taking into account their specific administrative needs as well as cultural/legal particularities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Capitals are used for terms defined in the Model Instrument.

  2. 2.

    Decreto 125 crea comité interministerial para la defensa del estado en controversias internacionales en materias relativas a inversiones y regula la coordinación para la solución de dichas controversias.

  3. 3.

    Reglamento para la Prevención y Atención de las Controversias Internacionales en Materia de Comercio e Inversión N° 35452-MP-COMEX.

  4. 4.

    Odluku o osnivanju Međuresornog povjerenstva za postupanje po zahtjevima stranih ulagača vezanim uz sporove koji proizlaze iz dvostranih ugovora Republike Hrvatske iz područja poticanja i zaštite ulaganja.

  5. 5.

    Decreto No. 303-15.

  6. 6.

    Noteikumi Nr. 228 Pārstāvības nodrošināšanas kārtība starptautisko ieguldījumu strīdu izskatīšanā.

  7. 7.

    Ley N° 28933 que establece el Sistema de coordinación y respuesta del estado en controversias internacionales de inversion.

  8. 8.

    Decision No. 04/2014/QD-TTg of the Prime Minister on promulgation of regulation on coordination in resolution of international investment disputes.

  9. 9.

    Decreto 1939 de 2013 por el cual se reglamenta la atención de controversias internacionales de inversión; Resolución 305 de 2014; Directiva Presidencial N. 2 de 2016.

  10. 10.

    Положение о Центре судебного представительства Правительства Кыргызской Республики (В редакции постановления Правительства КР от 10 июня 2014 года № 320, 7 сентября 2016 года № 487).

  11. 11.

    ICSID caseload statistics, Issue 2019-1; PCA Annual Report 2018; 2017 Dispute Resolution Statistics of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).

  12. 12.

    ICSID caseload statistics, Issue 2019-1.

  13. 13.

    Acuerdo gubernativo número 128-2009.

  14. 14.

    Acuerdo gubernativo número 94-2018.

  15. 15.

    UNCITRAL Rules of Transparency may apply to a certain extent.

  16. 16.

    https://defensajuridica.gov.co/Paginas/dji/index.aspx

  17. 17.

    Case T 2675-14, judgment of 9 December 2016. The State argued, among others: the complexity of the dispute; the fact that it was a sovereign state; that the sending of documents took time to reach the appropriate Ministry; that it could not easily understand English; that it must be afforded a reasonable time to retain counsel; and that the appointment of an arbitrator required careful consideration and communication. However, the arbitral institution had granted several time extensions.

  18. 18.

    Some new IIAs identify the specific agency that should receive notifications (e.g., annex 9-d of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, CPTPP) in case of an investor claim, though it is not clear whether such entity will be in charge of the defence and representation of the State.

  19. 19.

    See Caratube International Oil Company v. the Republic of Kazakhstan, ICSID case N. ARB/08/12, Decision on Provisional Measures, 31 July 2009.

  20. 20.

    22 USC § 2710.

  21. 21.

    E.g., In Caratube International Oil Company LLP and Mr Devincci Salah Hourani v. Kazakhstan (ICISD case N. ARB 13/13, Award 27 September 2017 –mentioning the 2015 decision on production of ‘Leaked Documents’) the tribunal authorised the submission on the record of non-privileged leaked documents in relation to certain documents that were allegedly publicly available on the internet as part of some 60,000 documents obtained through the hacking of the Respondent’s government systems and later leaked on a publicly available website.

  22. 22.

    Biwater Gauf (Tanzania) Ltd. v. the United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID case N. ARB/05/22, Procedural Order 3, 29 September 2006; United Utilities (Tallinn) B.V. et al. v Republic of Estonia, ICSID case N. ARB/14/24, Decision regarding provisional measures, 12 May 2016.

  23. 23.

    In the Biwater case, the tribunal also allowed the parties to publish their own documents and some tribunal decisions.

  24. 24.

    Published in YouTube and the web of the Presidency of the Dominican Republic about their success in a DR-CAFTA arbitration. June 2016.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Counsel and head of the Conflict Resolution Centre, Energy Charter Secretariat, Brussels, Belgium

    Alejandro Carballo Leyda

Authors
  1. Alejandro Carballo Leyda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Carballo Leyda .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong

    Julien Chaisse

  2. Professor of International Law; and Director of the Research and Innovation Theme in Democratic Citizenship, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Leïla Choukroune

  3. Institute of Malaysia and International Studies, National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

    Sufian Jusoh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Carballo Leyda, A. (2019). Model Instrument for Management of Investment Disputes. In: Chaisse, J., Choukroune, L., Jusoh, S. (eds) Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_19-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_19-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation