A Fair (?) Quantification of Damages in Investor-State Arbitration Proceedings: Reflections from the UNCITRAL Working Group III ISDS Reform Process
(2024) International Investment Law Journal — Vol. 4, n° 2, p. 165-183 (2024)
Files
Brouwer-AFairQuantificationofDamages2024.pdf
Open Access - Adobe PDF
- 397.43 KB
Details
- Authors
- Abstract
- This article considers the proposals advanced by some States in the context of the ISDS reform process at UNCITRAL’s Working Group III to curb a perceived tendency towards (too) “high” awards on damages in investment arbitration proceedings and “inconsistent” approaches to valuation methodologies. Based on an analysis of the arguments brought forward in that discussion, it argues that while clear procedural guidelines on the application of the valuation methodologies used by arbitrators would be a commendable outcome of the reform process, other proposals aimed at capping damages based on equitable considerations or contextual factors, including the financial capacity of the host State, pose more questions and may be more properly addressed in other venues or through existing tools.
- Affiliations
Citations
Brouwer, E. W. (2024). A Fair (?) Quantification of Damages in Investor-State Arbitration Proceedings: Reflections from the UNCITRAL Working Group III ISDS Reform Process. International Investment Law Journal, 4(2), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.62768/iilj/2024/4/2/04 (Original work published 2024)