The article analyses how ICSID tribunals’ treatment of evidence may ground an annulment decision. The study looks at ICISD regulations and tribunals’ and ad hoc Committees’ case law. It emerges that ad hoc Committees have conceded to the possibility of evidentiary issues as falling within one of the ground of annulment listed in Article 52 as a matter of principle, though rejecting so far. The analysis concludes that the “manifest excess of power” and the “serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure” grounds are suitable for annulment due to failures in the treatment of evidence. “Failure to state reasons” has also been invoked as a third ground relevant for the annulment of an award due to inappropriate treatment of evidence. However, this approach has been so far rejected by ad hoc Committees.
Farnelli, G. (2018). Treatment of evidence and ICSID Annulment Proceedings. RIVISTA DI DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE PRIVATO E PROCESSUALE, LIV, 59-80.
Treatment of evidence and ICSID Annulment Proceedings
Farnelli, G. M.
2018
Abstract
The article analyses how ICSID tribunals’ treatment of evidence may ground an annulment decision. The study looks at ICISD regulations and tribunals’ and ad hoc Committees’ case law. It emerges that ad hoc Committees have conceded to the possibility of evidentiary issues as falling within one of the ground of annulment listed in Article 52 as a matter of principle, though rejecting so far. The analysis concludes that the “manifest excess of power” and the “serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure” grounds are suitable for annulment due to failures in the treatment of evidence. “Failure to state reasons” has also been invoked as a third ground relevant for the annulment of an award due to inappropriate treatment of evidence. However, this approach has been so far rejected by ad hoc Committees.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
