ICISD tribunals' jurisdiction is premised on the eligible foreign investors, nationals of other contracting state party, with which the host state has agreed to submit pertinent investment disputes to international investment arbitration. The theme of this article is whether or under what conditions can ICSID tribunals pierce veil of pertinent companies to delimit the genuine foreign investors protected by relevant BITs. The article first takes a critical review of the theoretical foundations of Piercing Corporate Veil in ICSID arbitration. In terms of logic premise of tribunal's decision, “piercing corporate veil” cases in ICSID can be classified into three categories: nationality-agreement jurisdiction mode, nationals of host state as controlling shareholders mode, corporations as a form of investment mode. Investment tribunals should reconcile divergent approaches by interpreting pertinent agreements in a delicate way within express or implied authorization to promote the coherence and consistency of International Investment law as a system. This article emphasizes the analysis of the practices of ICSID tribunals and tries to reconcile the divergent approaches. International Investment Law is a legal system and the investor-state arbitration tribunals are empowered two functions: disputes resolution and treaty interpretation. The sequence of application of pertinent agreements is ICSID Convention, pertinent BIT and involved investment contracts. On procedural treatments, BIT stipulation shall not conflict with that of ICSID Convention unless providing more favorable treatment to investors, whilst the pertinent investment contracts and concessions enjoy supremacy in both procedural and substantial treatments. The whole international investment law regime is designed to strike a balance between protection of investors and sovereign regulation of host state. While protecting foreign investors, international investment law shall preserve necessary space for host states to maneuver for public policy. Thus in these three kind agreements exists one implied or default clause which is that none of the three kind agreements shall be interpreted as a barrier to stop host state from offering more favorable treatment, except host state preserves otherwise expressly.

Diploma Thesis from the year 2017 in the subject Law - Miscellaneous, grade: 1.7, Humboldt-University of Berlin (International Dispute Resolution Master of Laws (LL.M.) Programme), course: International Investment Arbitration, language: English, abstract: The piercing the corporate veil in ISDS plays a twofold role. From the investors’ perspective, it is instrumental if a tribunal can ignore the difference between the legal personality of the company in which they invested in and the shares that they hold. Per contra, States also invoke this doctrine by trying to convince a tribunal to look at the true personalities involved and not to allow an investor to hide behind the veil of the different legal personalities. To address these competing interests, the author of this Master Thesis in Chapter II intends to analyse the characteristic pattern and standing of shareholders in bringing indirect claims aimed to persuade the tribunal to ignore the difference between the legal personality of a company and its shareholders and to look at the true interests at stake instead. In Chapter III, the applicability of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine will be approached from the States’ perspective and when they invoke the denial of benefits clauses. On the basis of the foregoing, this Master Thesis purports to address the intersection between the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal in ISDS and the concepts of investor and investment underlying the application of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine. By doing so, the author of this Master Thesis explores the provisions of IIAs commented on by authoritative treatises, contemporary views embodied in articles, and jurisprudence of international investment treaty tribunals. In order to arrive at its findings and conclusions, this Master Thesis utilizes the method of description, method of conceptual analysis, comparative method, and method of evaluation.

Volume 11 brings the ICSID reports up to date and includes cases up to late 2005.

This is a practice-oriented guide, including text, commentary, tables and index, for anyone dealing with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

Arbitration Under International Investment Agreements: A Guide to the Key Issues provides a comprehensive analysis of the main issues that arise in investor-state arbitration. The contributing authors take the reader through the intricacies of this procedure before analyzing the main jurisdictional and substantive issues that confront arbitrators. The book concludes with a reflection on the role of precedent in investment arbitration. A diverse group of renowned experts in the field provide comprehensive coverage, making Arbitration Under International Investment Agreements a valuable resource for anyone working in or studying this field of law.

The ICSID Reports provide the only comprehensive published collection of arbitral awards and decisions given under the auspices of the World Bank's International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes or pursuant to other multilateral or bilateral investment treaties, including in particular the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). These decisions, which are fully indexed, make an important contribution to the growing body of jurisprudence on international investment. The ICSID Reports are an invaluable tool for practitioners and scholars working in the field of international commercial arbitration or advising foreign investors. Volume 14 of the ICSID Reports includes the award and annulment decision in the resubmitted Klöckner case, the award in Azurix v. Argentina and the award in Siemens v. Argentina.

This monograph offers a detailed and distinctive analysis of corporate nationality under international investment law, covering the ICSID Convention and the investment treaty framework. It takes the reader back to the basics, threading through the concepts of jurisdiction, nationality, and corporate personality to give a clear context to the discussion of corporate nationality under international investment law, at a time when international investment is dominated by multinational business enterprises operating in a globalised economy. The book examines different understandings of corporate personality and nationality under a selection of jurisdictions and public international law. It also offers an in-depth analysis of approaches found in ICSID arbitral awards and in investment treaty practice, distilling the problematic areas and discussing the impacts of the areas of concern. It evaluates the techniques developed to address problems and puts forward suggestions for effective and balanced solutions to the questions of corporate nationality and personal scope of investment protection.