A study on the jurisdiction of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes pursuant to article 25 of the centre/ c ySherwan Saleem Qader
This study aims to determine the scope of Jurisdiction of the International Centre in the light of the provisions of the Washington Convention, in particular examine the jurisdiction of the International Centre for the settlement of investment disputes pursuant to Article 25 of the Centre, and some...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Gombak, Selangor :
Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia,
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Click here to view 1st 24 pages of the thesis. Members can view fulltext at the specified PCs in the library. |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This study aims to determine the scope of Jurisdiction of the International Centre in the light of the provisions of the Washington Convention, in particular examine the jurisdiction of the International Centre for the settlement of investment disputes pursuant to Article 25 of the Centre, and some decisions of arbitral tribunals of the Centre. Article 25 of the Washington Convention 1965 has defined the scope of Jurisdiction of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and set the outer limits of the concept of investors and investments that are protected under the Convention. The ICSID Convention's applicability is dependent upon satisfaction of the jurisdictional criteria incorporated in its Article 25, namely that: (a) the dispute arose directly out of an investment in the host state; (b) the disputing parties are ICSID Contracting States and nationals of another ICSID Contracting State; and (c) both parties consent in writing for submission of the dispute to an arbitration tribunal under the ICSID Convention. These are objective jurisdictional requirements that cannot be waived by parties' agreement, and ICSID arbitration tribunals must ensure all three requirements are satisfied before moving on to the merits of the case. However, the arbitral tribunals are still struggling to define their jurisdiction. There are several decisions of arbitral tribunals of the Centre creating doubts on its interpretation of the convention. |
|---|---|
| Physical Description: | x, 105 leaves : ill. ; 30cm. |
| Bibliography: | Includes bibliographical references (leaves 100-105). |