The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) was founded in 1917. It is part of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, but acts independently in its administration of domestic and international disputes. On February 2017, the SCC published a report on investor-state disputes registered at the SCC, describing among other things, the nationalities of the parties and arbitrators appointed, the basis of consent invoked by investors, the outcomes of the cases decided under…
In the recent case of Sanum Investments Ltd v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2016] SGCA…
With the ascension of the Trump administration, there is a question whether the investor-state dispute settlement (“ISDS”) provisions…
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (‘CETA’) between the European Union and Canada was signed October 30, 2016. The deepening of Canadian and European trade is likely to be significant in the wake of Brexit and the uncertain future of American trade policy. The Investment Court System (‘ICS’) of CETA has been hotly debated, and in 2016 threatened to derail the entire agreement when the local Parliament of Wallonia, Belgium initially vetoed the agreement. The…
While toasting the New Year over a glass or two of champagne, it may have gone unnoticed to…
Investment treaty arbitrations may be brought under the rules of many different arbitration institutions. As can be expected,…
In its last week’s decision[1], the German Federal Constitutional Court gave green light for the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (‘CETA’)[2] between the European Union (‘EU’) and Canada. CETA is one of the three free trade agreements hotly debated in politics and industry (the other two being ‘TTIP'[3] and ‘TPP'[4]). On 18 October 2016 the Council of the EU plans to adopt a package of decisions on CETA[5], explicitly decisions which fall under the exclusive…
In its report “Costs of arbitration and apportionment of costs under the SCC Rules” of February 2016[1], the…
This article is about two phenomena which currently impact the business of dispute resolution: The Vanishing Trial and…
A tribunal in an investment arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules between South American Silver Limited (“Claimant”) and The Plurinational State of Bolivia (“Bolivia”)[1] decided in several procedural orders on the question whether the parties are allowed to submit witness statements in redacted form. The most recent decision stems from 6 May 2016[2]. In its first decision of 1 April 2016[3] the tribunal had to decide whether to grant a protective order for one…