Scholarlink

In its 2018 Commission Report on Financial Institutions and International Arbitration, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) stated that investment arbitration “is a relatively novel feature in the banking and financial landscape” (International Chamber of Commerce (2018), ICC Commission Report, Financial Institutions and International Arbitration, p. 2.). As of today, there have been around 112 cases of known investor-States arbitrations in the banking and finance sectors (UNCTAD, Investment Policy Hub, available at the following link: https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/investment-dispute-settlement ). About half of these have reached a final award. The percentages of success/failure are roughly equal for States and investors. Nonetheless, the scenario described by the above-mentioned Commission Report on Financial Institutions and International Arbitration has faced a rapid change in the last few years. Prompted in part by the financial crisis, banks and financial institutions started to appreciate the protections afforded to them by international investment law and their use of investment arbitration as a forum for pursuing claims is on the rise (For an analysis of the driving factors for the use of investment arbitration in banking and financial disputes see Yves Mersch, Laurie Achtouk-Spivak, Georges Affaki, Cristina Contartese, Ramón Vidal Puig, The new challenges raised by investment arbitration for the EU legal order, ECB Legal Working Series Paper, no. 19, 2019, p. 27.). Moreover, investors have been also discovering the possibility to activate investment arbitration against States in the context of banking crises. This has evidenced some well-known critical issues in the more general domain of investment arbitration. For example, possible different treatments for national and foreign investors, concurrent proceedings and the absence of res judicata, the relationship between investment protection and EU law, etc. This paper shall address a few of these issues and depict the most recent developments in the field.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Judicial Protection and International Investment Arbitration in the Context of Bank Resolution Concurrent Proceedings

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Cecilia Carrara

摘要

In its 2018 Commission Report on Financial Institutions and International Arbitration, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) stated that investment arbitration “is a relatively novel feature in the banking and financial landscape” (International Chamber of Commerce (2018), ICC Commission Report, Financial Institutions and International Arbitration, p. 2.). As of today, there have been around 112 cases of known investor-States arbitrations in the banking and finance sectors (UNCTAD, Investment Policy Hub, available at the following link: https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/investment-dispute-settlement ). About half of these have reached a final award. The percentages of success/failure are roughly equal for States and investors. Nonetheless, the scenario described by the above-mentioned Commission Report on Financial Institutions and International Arbitration has faced a rapid change in the last few years. Prompted in part by the financial crisis, banks and financial institutions started to appreciate the protections afforded to them by international investment law and their use of investment arbitration as a forum for pursuing claims is on the rise (For an analysis of the driving factors for the use of investment arbitration in banking and financial disputes see Yves Mersch, Laurie Achtouk-Spivak, Georges Affaki, Cristina Contartese, Ramón Vidal Puig, The new challenges raised by investment arbitration for the EU legal order, ECB Legal Working Series Paper, no. 19, 2019, p. 27.). Moreover, investors have been also discovering the possibility to activate investment arbitration against States in the context of banking crises. This has evidenced some well-known critical issues in the more general domain of investment arbitration. For example, possible different treatments for national and foreign investors, concurrent proceedings and the absence of res judicata, the relationship between investment protection and EU law, etc. This paper shall address a few of these issues and depict the most recent developments in the field.