The Arbitration Brief

ISDS at a Crossroads: Diverging Paths in the U.S. and U.K.

By Kaitlyn Welsh Introduction The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) is the leading institution administering Investor-State Dispute Settlement (“ISDS”) cases, handling about 70% of all international investment disputes. The objective of ISDS is to provide foreign investors of host states with a neutral forum to resolve such disputes as opposed to reliance…

The Impact of International Covenants on Human Rights and Arbitration

By Malini Prasad Millions of people around the world are trapped in harmful global supply chains. The fast fashion industry, and multinational conglomerates must aid in stopping and preventing these human rights abuses. Therefore, the International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration (“ICC Court”) should adopt the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and…

The Aftermath of N. N. Global III: The Saga Continues

By Nidhisha Garg Background The Indian Supreme Court’s (Supreme Court) decision in ‘In re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899’(N. N. Global III) was hailed when it was passed in December 2023 as it finally put to rest the long-standing controversy surrounding the validity…

The Corruption Defense in Investor-State Arbitration: Why ICSID is the Wrong Forum

By Elizabeth Sheridan The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) was created in 1966 to promote international investment by providing confidence in the dispute resolution process. In many developing countries, it is essential to attract consistent foreign investment to provide necessary capital and infrastructure conducive for long-term economic and institutional development. Investor-state dispute…

Winning Isn’t Getting Paid: Russia and the Enforcement Crisis in Arbitration

By Esther Eikins International arbitration is often regarded as the premier mechanism for resolving cross-border disputes because it promises neutral decision-making and enforceable outcomes. Yet enforcement battles involving Russia reveal how fragile this system can be when geopolitical conflict intervenes. Although the enforcement framework under the New York Convention relies on national courts to recognize…