Search Results

huge controversy about the admissibility of mass claims in investment treaty arbitration. In this regard, the literatures on this issue arrive at conflicting conclusion. This article thus aims to provide a more balanced approach to mass claims in investment treaty arbitration on sovereign debt disputes

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

I will look here at some innovations that have been introduced by international mass claims tribunals. While I will focus mainly on international claims tribunals, one should note that international mass claims and domestic class actions are closely related. Although international claims

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

I will first discuss mass claims as administered by the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and then the phenomenon of U.S. class actions, but within the arbitral regime. Mass claims, as I here discuss them, will be from the perspective of a personal civil wrong between private parties and not

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

agreed to a different mass claims process, and that is our subject. A foundation was set up under a German statute enacted by the German Federal Parliament for this specific purpose. The Foundation was funded 50:50 by German industry and Germany as a State. The Foundation has its articles; it operates

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

proceedings’ and ‘representative proceedings’ (para. 263), 6 whereas the Ambiente tribunal had preferred the term ‘multi-party proceeding,’ which was not a ‘mass claim’ or a ‘class action’ (paras. 265–266). 7 The Tribunal eschewed this ‘battle of terminology’ (para. 267), 8 but nonetheless concluded that

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

as well as mass claim settlement procedures afford this two-tiered possibility—go to the quick fix administrative system for the resolution of ordinary matters and use the courts for those matters which, because of their nature or scale, require a more precise, differentiated approach. The General

In: International Organizations Law Review

Journal of International Law , 3 Lea further explores International Mass Claims Commissions ( IMCC s) as semi-public institutions and she analyzes motivations behind the formation and function of IMCC s—in particular whether IMCC s are originally created to provide compensation and/or closure

In: Resolving Conflicts in the Law

–118). Further, with only 90 claimants, it was not a “mass claim,” unlike the concurrently running arbitration Abaclat and Others v. Argentina , which involves 60,000 Italian holders of Argentine bonds and Argentina in (paras. 119–120). The majority thus adopted the more accurate terminology “multi

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade

for the reach of an mfn clause. c The Jurisdiction over or Admissibility of Mass Claims before icsid In addition, some of the recent bondholder cases, particularly those against Argentina, have dealt with an interesting admissibility issue, i.e. the question whether investment arbitration

In: The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals