SUMMARY: MEDIATION OF COMMERCIAL DISPUTES - DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES Dr. Martin Svatoš This paper addresses the mediation and its use in the both domestic and international commercial disputes. The milieu that serves as a source of the problems to be resolved during mediation is a specific one. It demands quick, cost-effective and confidential resolution of complicated disputes involving several parties. In general, this cannot be granted by the traditional ways of dispute resolution - litigation and arbitration. Mediation is regarded as a cost-effective and quick extrajudicial resolution of disputes in civil and commercial matters through processes tailored to the needs of the parties. On the other hand, there are several legal and legal-related issues that have to be discussed. And thus, the question that remains to be answered is: Is mediation really as effective as it is told? And in the case of a positive answer - why it is not the most commonly used dispute resolution procedure? The main goal of this thesis is to answer these queries. Its first part focuses on the issue of mediation in general. Quite surprisingly, there is no exact definition of mediation neither in the legal acts, nor in the opinion of the ADR experts. In contrast, plenty of definition can be found after short...

Am Beispiel der UdSSR werden formale und inhaltliche Voraussetzungen eines Beitritts eines (noch) "sozialistischen" Staates mit einer Zentralverwaltungswirtschaft zu den beiden wichtigsten internationalen Finanzinstitutionen, Internationaler Währungsfonds und Weltbank (samt deren "Schwester"-Organisationen), diskutiert.

<p style="text-align: justify;">Правна заштита страних улагања од некомерцијалних ризика заснована је на примени правних стандарда, тј. начела о третману страних улагања која су настала у оквиру међународног права, и која по правилу обавезују стране у међународноправним односима поводом страних улагања. Међу стандардима заштите страних улагања нарочито се истиче стандард поштеног и правичног третмана по свом правном дејству, широком пољу примене и заступљености у међународним изворима инвестиционог права. Све то за последицу има његову честу примену у пракси.<br />Циљ овог истраживања је свеобухватна анализа стандарда поштеног и правичног третмана, која би пружила општи прегледњегових нормативних извора, тумачења и примене у пракси. На тај начин би научна и стручна јавност у Србији и региону могла имати на једном месту детаљан приказ овог стандарда на српском језику са анализом спорних питања и могућим решењима.<br />У складу са том концепцијом, први део рада садржи преглед међународних извора права, који предвиђају поштен и правичан третман страног улагача. У оквиру међународних уговора о заштити страних улагања приказани су релевантни двострани и вишестрани споразуми.<br />Након тога је изложен настанак и развој стандарда поштеног и правичног третманапре ере инвестиционих споразума и инвестиционих арбитража.У овом делу истраживања пажња је посвећена стандарду минималног третмана из међународног обичајног права и нацртимарелевантних међународних инструмената.<br />Наредна фаза истраживања се односи на правну природу стандарда поштеног и правичног третмана. У том смислу је извршена анализа овог стандарда као дела општег међународног права и као самосталног стандарда међународног инвестиционог права.<br />Најзад, у делу који се односи на садржинустандарда поштеног и правичног третмана приказани су и анализирани елементи његове садржине, као својеврсни подстандарди. Према систематици овог рада, то су: поступање са дужном пажњом и пружање заштитеинвестицији, ускраћивање правде, арбитрарно и дискриминаторско поступање, заштита легитимних очекивања инвеститора, заштита од узнемиравања и савесност државе домаћина. Овај део рада је најобимнији, јер је питање садржине стандарда суштинско за његово правилно разумевање и примену у пракси. Сваки елемент је представљен најпре уз приказ теоријских схватања, а затим кроз анализу арбитражних одлука.<br />На крају рада су изложена закључна разматрања у оквиру којих су сумирани резултати истраживања.</p> / <p style="text-align: justify;">Pravna zaštita stranih ulaganja od nekomercijalnih rizika zasnovana je na primeni pravnih standarda, tj. načela o tretmanu stranih ulaganja koja su nastala u okviru međunarodnog prava, i koja po pravilu obavezuju strane u međunarodnopravnim odnosima povodom stranih ulaganja. Među standardima zaštite stranih ulaganja naročito se ističe standard poštenog i pravičnog tretmana po svom pravnom dejstvu, širokom polju primene i zastupljenosti u međunarodnim izvorima investicionog prava. Sve to za posledicu ima njegovu čestu primenu u praksi.<br />Cilj ovog istraživanja je sveobuhvatna analiza standarda poštenog i pravičnog tretmana, koja bi pružila opšti preglednjegovih normativnih izvora, tumačenja i primene u praksi. Na taj način bi naučna i stručna javnost u Srbiji i regionu mogla imati na jednom mestu detaljan prikaz ovog standarda na srpskom jeziku sa analizom spornih pitanja i mogućim rešenjima.<br />U skladu sa tom koncepcijom, prvi deo rada sadrži pregled međunarodnih izvora prava, koji predviđaju pošten i pravičan tretman stranog ulagača. U okviru međunarodnih ugovora o zaštiti stranih ulaganja prikazani su relevantni dvostrani i višestrani sporazumi.<br />Nakon toga je izložen nastanak i razvoj standarda poštenog i pravičnog tretmanapre ere investicionih sporazuma i investicionih arbitraža.U ovom delu istraživanja pažnja je posvećena standardu minimalnog tretmana iz međunarodnog običajnog prava i nacrtimarelevantnih međunarodnih instrumenata.<br />Naredna faza istraživanja se odnosi na pravnu prirodu standarda poštenog i pravičnog tretmana. U tom smislu je izvršena analiza ovog standarda kao dela opšteg međunarodnog prava i kao samostalnog standarda međunarodnog investicionog prava.<br />Najzad, u delu koji se odnosi na sadržinustandarda poštenog i pravičnog tretmana prikazani su i analizirani elementi njegove sadržine, kao svojevrsni podstandardi. Prema sistematici ovog rada, to su: postupanje sa dužnom pažnjom i pružanje zaštiteinvesticiji, uskraćivanje pravde, arbitrarno i diskriminatorsko postupanje, zaštita legitimnih očekivanja investitora, zaštita od uznemiravanja i savesnost države domaćina. Ovaj deo rada je najobimniji, jer je pitanje sadržine standarda suštinsko za njegovo pravilno razumevanje i primenu u praksi. Svaki element je predstavljen najpre uz prikaz teorijskih shvatanja, a zatim kroz analizu arbitražnih odluka.<br />Na kraju rada su izložena zaključna razmatranja u okviru kojih su sumirani rezultati istraživanja.</p> / <p style="text-align: justify;">Legal protection of foreign investments from non-commercial risks is based onthe application of legal standards i.e. principles of treatment of foreign investment originating from international law, which as a rule bind the parties involved in international legal relationships related to foreign investments. Among all foreign investment protection standards, the fair and equitable treatment standard stands out as the most prominent in its legal effect, broad scope and omnipresence in the international sources of investment law. All these features result in the frequent application of this standard in practice.<br />The goal of this research is a comprehensive analysis of the fair and equitable treatment standard, which would offer a deep insight into its normative sources, interpretation and practical applications. The scientific and professional community both in Serbia and the region would thus obtain a unified and detailed survey of the standard in the Serbian language explaining many disputable issues and their possible solutions.<br />In accordance with the outlined concept, the first partof this research contains a survey of sources of international law which provide for fair and equitable treatment of foreign investors. Among international treaties on foreign investment protection, relevant bilateral and multirateral agreements are reviewed.<br />Following the first part, the second part of this research explains the origin and development of the fair and equitable treatment standard prior to the age of investment agreements and investment arbitration. In the second part, the research focus is on the minimum treatment standard under the international customary law and drafts of relevant international instruments.<br />The next research phase refers to the legal character of the fair and equitable treatment standard. In this sense, an analysis of the standard has been performed, both as an integral part of general international law and as an independant standard of international investment law.<br />Finally, in the part referring to the contents of the fair and equitable treatment standard, elements of the standard are displayed and analysed as sort of substandards. According to the systematics applied in this paper, these are: due diligence in the protection of investment, denial of justice, arbitrary and discriminatory treatment, protection of investor legitimate expectations, and protection against harassment and bad faith of the host country. This is the most comprehensive portion of the paper because the issue of the contents of this standard is essential for its proper understanding and practical application. Each element of the contents is first presented from the doctrinal point of view, and then through the analysis of arbitral awards.<br />In the conclusion that follows in the final part of the paper, the research results are summarized.</p>

Selon une présentation classique, le droit du contentieux international est apprécié à travers les concepts de pouvoir de juger, de compétence et de recevabilité. Force est toutefois de constater qu’il est aujourd’hui souvent fait référence, dans les décisions des juridictions internationales comme dans la doctrine, à la faculté procédurale, notamment des personnes privées. Cet intérêt pour la situation du requérant et sa faculté d’obtenir une décision sur le fond de son différend interroge quant à une possible évolution des concepts juridiques régissant la matière. L’étude de ce « droit » d’action dans le cadre du contentieux des investissements permet de se rendre compte de l’utilité de la notion pour le droit du contentieux international. D’une part, une fois déployé, le concept réalise un ordonnancement efficace des règles déterminant la possibilité d’une décision sur le fond. La pratique arbitrale fait preuve à cet égard d’une certaine confusion entre ces règles et celles encadrant l’existence de l’obligation alléguée que l’étude permet de dissiper. D’autre part, le droit d’agir en justice permet plus généralement d’appréhender les effets juridiques du consentement de l’Etat à la juridiction. L’étude démontre en effet que la faculté procédurale procède de l’invocabilité de ce consentement : celui-ci reconnaît à l’entité visée par l’engagement le droit d’agir en justice. Or cet effet juridique ne peut être valablement saisi par le concept de pouvoir de juger, lequel procède de la réunion des consentements. Puisque le contentieux des investissements s’intéresse à plusieurs égards à cette invocabilité, soit pour la préserver soit pour la remettre en cause, on comprend que le droit d’agir soit devenu un concept incontournable en la matière. Mais la nécessité d’y recourir peut s’exporter au-delà du contentieux des investissements, n’importe quelle branche du contentieux international pouvant être intéressée à régir les effets juridiques du consentement du seul Etat défendeur. / The settlement of international disputes is classically studied thought the concepts of judicial power, jurisdiction and admissibility. However it is now common to find references to the notion of « right of action » or « right of claim » in decisions of international tribunals especially when individuals are involved. One might wonder whether this observation reveals an evolution in the concepts governing disputes settlement in international law. The study of the right of action in international investment law demonstrates the usefulness of the concept in explaining the applicable rules. First, as a key concept, it can be used to identify the rules that determine the possibility to obtain a decision of the tribunal as opposed to the rules governing the State’s responsibility. In practice, it appears that the tribunals do not always respect this distinction. Secondly, the right of action allows taking into account the legal consequences of the State’s consent to arbitration. In this case, the concept of judicial power is partly irrelevant as it is usually based on a consent agreement between the parties. It follows that the concept of right of action is relevant when the applicable rules deal with the possibility to invoke and to rely on the consent to jurisdiction expressed by the respondent State. The fact that it is the case in the settlement of disputes between a State and an investor does not mean that it can not be so in the context of a interstate dispute.

A proposta desta dissertação de mestrado é apresentar o mecanismo de solução de controvérsias investidor-Estado tipicamente utilizado nos Acordos de Promoção e Proteção de Investimento (APPIs) e já consolidado no Direito Internacional do Investimento a arbitragem de investimento segundo as regras do Centro Internacional para a Resolução de Disputas Relativas a Investimentos (CIRDI) e as alternativas (auto e heterocompositivas) a esse mecanismo, já debatidas internacionalmente. A justificativa fundamental para este estudo é a constatação de que o Brasil ocupa uma posição de destaque no cenário internacional, com um movimento crescente de internacionalização de empresas nacionais, mas sem uma política pública de apoio e proteção a essa internacionalização. Para cumprir este objetivo, a dissertação: (i) contextualiza a temática da proteção do investimento no âmbito do Direito Internacional Econômico, bem como apresenta as principais características dos Acordos de Promoção e Proteção de Investimentos, introduzindo a perspectiva brasileira sobre o assunto; (ii) apresenta a arbitragem de investimento, enquanto espécie de arbitragem distinta da arbitragem comercial e da arbitragem entre Estados; (iii) apresenta o CIRDI, indicando as características que objetivaram tornar a arbitragem realizada sob seus auspícios verdadeiramente internacional, e; (iv) apresenta as alternativas ao mecanismo do CIRDI, com especial enfoque à arbitragem de investimentos regulada por leis nacionais e protegida pela Convenção de Nova Iorque de 1958 sobre o Reconhecimento e Execução de Sentenças Arbitrais Estrangeiras. Em síntese, a dissertação conclui que: (a) A limitação à liberdade regulatória do Estado, em virtude dos compromissos internacionais assumidos visando a proteção e promoção do investimento, é uma decorrência das garantias legais substantivas dos APPIs e não uma decorrência direta do método de resolução de conflitos escolhido. b) O objetivo da cláusula de resolução de controvérsias investidor-Estado é criar um mecanismo neutro de solução de controvérsias, evitando sua susceptibilidade a influências políticas locais. (c) O CIRDI foi a organização internacional criada pelos Estados para administrar procedimentos internacionais de resolução de controvérsias investidor-Estado, que passou a ser criticada em virtude de três fatores: (i) inconsistência das decisões de tribunais arbitrais e comitês de anulação do CIRDI em assuntos sensíveis para os Estados; (ii) falta de transparência na condução dos processos; e (iii) falta de um mecanismos para mediar e resolver conflitos envolvendo os próprios árbitros. (d) Existem alternativas ao CIRDI, já implementadas e utilizadas internacionalmente. A primeira alternativa é o tradicional mecanismo da proteção diplomática. A segunda alternativa são os métodos auto compositivos de solução de controvérsias. A terceira é a arbitragem de investimento realizada fora dos auspícios do CIRDI e sujeita ao controle de cortes nacionais. (e) A proteção conferida pela Lei Modelo da UNCITRAL e a Convenção de Nova Iorque para a arbitragem de investimentos pode ser semelhante à conferida pela Convenção de Washington ao CIRDI, desde que observadas algumas peculiaridades da legislação e judiciário locais. / The purpose of this dissertation is to present the investor-State dispute resolution mechanism typically used in Agreements for the Promotion and Protection of Investments (APPIs) and already consolidated in International Investment Law investment arbitration pursuant to the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the alternatives to this mechanism that have been discussed internationally. The fundamental reason for this dissertation is the acknowledgement that Brazil occupies an important position in the international scenario, with growing level of internationalization of Brazilian companies, but without a public policy for the support and protection of this internationalization. To fulfill this objective, the dissertation: (i) contextualize the investment protection theme under International Economic Law, as well as presents the main characteristics of the APPIs; (ii) introduces investment arbitration as an species of the gender arbitration, distinct from commercial arbitration and inter-State arbitration; (iii) introduces ICSID, indicating the characteristics that aimed to make arbitration under its rules truly international, and; (iv) introduces the alternatives to ICSID mechanism, with special emphasis to investment arbitration governed by national law and protected by the 1958 New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. In a nutshell, the dissertation concludes that: (a) the limits to regulatory freedom of a State because of the international commitments assumed for the protection and promotion of investment are a consequence of substantive legal guarantees of the APPIs and not of the dispute resolution method chosen; (b) the objective of the investor-State dispute resolution provision is to create a neutral dispute resolution mechanism, avoiding local political influences; (c) ICSID was the international organization created by the States to administer international investor-State dispute resolution procedures now being criticized for three reasons: (i) inconsistencies of decisions by arbitral tribunals and annulment committees in sensitive issues to States; (ii) lack of transparency in the conduct of the proceedings; and (iii) lack of a mechanism to mediate and solve conflicts regarding the arbitrators; (d) there are alternatives to ICSID, some of which have already been implemented and used internationally. The first alternative is the classic method of diplomatic protection. The second alternative are the amicable dispute resolution methods. The third alternative is investment arbitration done outside of ICSIDs rules and subject to the control of national courts, pursuant to national Law; (e) the protection granted to investment arbitration by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration and the New York Convention are similar to the protection granted to ICSID arbitration by the Washington Convention, as long as some peculiarities of the municipal law and courts are observed.

Die Beilegung von Investitionsstreitigkeit erfolgt innerhalb des ICSID-Systems durch die nicht ständigen und für jeden Fall neu gebildeten ICSID-Schiedsgerichte. Mit Institutionen zur Sicherung der homogenen Entwicklung der Rechtsprechung wie die EG-Generalanwälte, die EG-Vorabentscheidung, das WTO-„Appellate Body“ oder die einem Berufungsverfahren gleichstehende Verweisung an die Große Kammer des EMRGH ist allerdings das ICSID-System nicht ausgestattet. Vielmehr ist die Möglichkeit einer Berufung innerhalb des ICSID-Systems ausdrücklich ausgeschlossen. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird die Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung geprüft, um festzustellen, ob die Rechtsprechung der für jeden Fall neu gebildeten ICSID-Schiedsgerichte derartige Dissonanzen aufweist, die das ICSID-System reformbedürftig machen. Die Prüfung der Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung bezieht sich auf die Auslegung von gleichen bzw. ähnlichen Bestimmungen völkerrechtlicher Investitionsschutzabkommen sowie des ICSID-Übereinkommens selbst durch die ICSID-Schiedsgerichte und betrifft im einzelnen die folgenden Themen: (a) Definition des Begriffs „Investition“ im Sinne des ICSID-Übereinkommens. (b) Ausdehnung der Reichweite der Meistbegünstigungsklausel auf Verfahrensvorschriften. (c) Zuständigkeit der ICSID-Schiedsgerichte für reine Verletzungen von Investitionsverträgen mittels weiter Streitbeilegungsvorschriften und Regenschirmklauseln. (d) Standard der Enteignungsentschädigung und Unterscheidung zwischen indirekter Enteignung und staatlicher Regulierung. (e) Völkervertraglicher und völkergewohnheitsrechtlicher Notstand. Die Untersuchung kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass die ICSID-Rechtsprechung an Heterogenität leidet. Dementsprechend bildet der Mangel an Mechanismen zur Sicherung der Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung ein schwerwiegendes institutionelles Defizit. Es ist daher dringend, dass das ICSID-System unmittelbar reformiert wird, vorzugsweise durch die Schaffung einer ICSID-Berufungsinstanz. / The settlement of investment disputes within the ICSID system is carried out by the ICSID arbitral tribunals which are non-permanent judicial bodies. Every separate case is adjudicated by a different tribunal. The ICSID system, however, does not provide for any institutions similar to the EC Advocate Generals, the EC preliminary rulings, the WTO Appellate Body or to the appeal-like process of the referral to the Grand Chamber of the ECHR capable of securing the homogenous development of the case-law. Moreover, the possibility of appeal of an arbitral award is explicitly excluded within the ICSID system. The present thesis examines the homogeneity of the ICSID jurisprudence in order to ascertain whether the case-law of the separate and not standing ICSID panels proves to be so inconsistent that the ICSID system is in need of reform. The study of the homogeneity of the ICSID jurisprudence concerns the interpretation of identical and similar provisions laid down in international investment treaties as well as of the ICSID Convention itself by the ICSID panels. In particular, it deals with the following topics: (a) Definition of the term “investment” pursuant to the ICSID Convention. (b) Extension of the scope of application of the most-favoured-nation clause to procedural provisions. (c) Jurisdiction of ICSID tribunals over mere violations of an investment contract through broad dispute settlement clauses and umbrella clauses. (d) Standard of compensation for expropriation and distinction between indirect expropriation and state regulation. (e) State of necessity under customary and investment treaty law. This study comes to the conclusion that the ICSID jurisprudence suffers from heterogeneity. Thus, the lack of mechanisms able to secure the consistency of the ICSID case-law constitutes a serious institutional deficit. It is, therefore, urgent to reform the ICSID system immediately, preferably by way of establishing an ICSID appellate authority.

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

A proposta desta dissertação de mestrado é apresentar o mecanismo de solução de controvérsias investidor-Estado tipicamente utilizado nos Acordos de Promoção e Proteção de Investimento (APPIs) e já consolidado no Direito Internacional do Investimento a arbitragem de investimento segundo as regras do Centro Internacional para a Resolução de Disputas Relativas a Investimentos (CIRDI) e as alternativas (auto e heterocompositivas) a esse mecanismo, já debatidas internacionalmente. A justificativa fundamental para este estudo é a constatação de que o Brasil ocupa uma posição de destaque no cenário internacional, com um movimento crescente de internacionalização de empresas nacionais, mas sem uma política pública de apoio e proteção a essa internacionalização. Para cumprir este objetivo, a dissertação: (i) contextualiza a temática da proteção do investimento no âmbito do Direito Internacional Econômico, bem como apresenta as principais características dos Acordos de Promoção e Proteção de Investimentos, introduzindo a perspectiva brasileira sobre o assunto; (ii) apresenta a arbitragem de investimento, enquanto espécie de arbitragem distinta da arbitragem comercial e da arbitragem entre Estados; (iii) apresenta o CIRDI, indicando as características que objetivaram tornar a arbitragem realizada sob seus auspícios verdadeiramente internacional, e; (iv) apresenta as alternativas ao mecanismo do CIRDI, com especial enfoque à arbitragem de investimentos regulada por leis nacionais e protegida pela Convenção de Nova Iorque de 1958 sobre o Reconhecimento e Execução de Sentenças Arbitrais Estrangeiras. Em síntese, a dissertação conclui que: (a) A limitação à liberdade regulatória do Estado, em virtude dos compromissos internacionais assumidos visando a proteção e promoção do investimento, é uma decorrência das garantias legais substantivas dos APPIs e não uma decorrência direta do método de resolução de conflitos escolhido. b) O objetivo da cláusula de resolução de controvérsias investidor-Estado é criar um mecanismo neutro de solução de controvérsias, evitando sua susceptibilidade a influências políticas locais. (c) O CIRDI foi a organização internacional criada pelos Estados para administrar procedimentos internacionais de resolução de controvérsias investidor-Estado, que passou a ser criticada em virtude de três fatores: (i) inconsistência das decisões de tribunais arbitrais e comitês de anulação do CIRDI em assuntos sensíveis para os Estados; (ii) falta de transparência na condução dos processos; e (iii) falta de um mecanismos para mediar e resolver conflitos envolvendo os próprios árbitros. (d) Existem alternativas ao CIRDI, já implementadas e utilizadas internacionalmente. A primeira alternativa é o tradicional mecanismo da proteção diplomática. A segunda alternativa são os métodos auto compositivos de solução de controvérsias. A terceira é a arbitragem de investimento realizada fora dos auspícios do CIRDI e sujeita ao controle de cortes nacionais. (e) A proteção conferida pela Lei Modelo da UNCITRAL e a Convenção de Nova Iorque para a arbitragem de investimentos pode ser semelhante à conferida pela Convenção de Washington ao CIRDI, desde que observadas algumas peculiaridades da legislação e judiciário locais. / The purpose of this dissertation is to present the investor-State dispute resolution mechanism typically used in Agreements for the Promotion and Protection of Investments (APPIs) and already consolidated in International Investment Law investment arbitration pursuant to the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the alternatives to this mechanism that have been discussed internationally. The fundamental reason for this dissertation is the acknowledgement that Brazil occupies an important position in the international scenario, with growing level of internationalization of Brazilian companies, but without a public policy for the support and protection of this internationalization. To fulfill this objective, the dissertation: (i) contextualize the investment protection theme under International Economic Law, as well as presents the main characteristics of the APPIs; (ii) introduces investment arbitration as an species of the gender arbitration, distinct from commercial arbitration and inter-State arbitration; (iii) introduces ICSID, indicating the characteristics that aimed to make arbitration under its rules truly international, and; (iv) introduces the alternatives to ICSID mechanism, with special emphasis to investment arbitration governed by national law and protected by the 1958 New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. In a nutshell, the dissertation concludes that: (a) the limits to regulatory freedom of a State because of the international commitments assumed for the protection and promotion of investment are a consequence of substantive legal guarantees of the APPIs and not of the dispute resolution method chosen; (b) the objective of the investor-State dispute resolution provision is to create a neutral dispute resolution mechanism, avoiding local political influences; (c) ICSID was the international organization created by the States to administer international investor-State dispute resolution procedures now being criticized for three reasons: (i) inconsistencies of decisions by arbitral tribunals and annulment committees in sensitive issues to States; (ii) lack of transparency in the conduct of the proceedings; and (iii) lack of a mechanism to mediate and solve conflicts regarding the arbitrators; (d) there are alternatives to ICSID, some of which have already been implemented and used internationally. The first alternative is the classic method of diplomatic protection. The second alternative are the amicable dispute resolution methods. The third alternative is investment arbitration done outside of ICSIDs rules and subject to the control of national courts, pursuant to national Law; (e) the protection granted to investment arbitration by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration and the New York Convention are similar to the protection granted to ICSID arbitration by the Washington Convention, as long as some peculiarities of the municipal law and courts are observed.

Disposal with an Investment Claim JUDr. Filip Černý International investment protection is very special legal discipline which stands at the borderline between public and private, international and national (domestic) law. The intersections between these legal areas produce a vast range of questions on the applicable law and the nature of the legal institutes inherent to investment protection. The legal system of investment protection is founded on a matrix consisting of bilateral and multilateral treaties and simultaneously shares some of the customary origins inherent to diplomatic protection of foreigners. The particularity of the investment protection system is given by the existence of the diagonal relations between the host state and the investor of the other state. The combination of the public international law sources and the diagonal relations developing inside the public international law matrix induce questions on the nature of such rights and obligations arising inside of the investment protection system among its actors. Author analyses these relations with an aim to determine the nature of the investment claim as a prerequisite for a volitional disposal of the investment claim by the investor.