Aceris Law

International Arbitration Law Firm

Investment Arbitration

Third-Party Funding and Confidentiality in Investment Arbitration: Kappes v. Guatemala

by

Third-party funding is increasingly common in investment arbitration. It can give investors access to treaty claims, but it may also raise issues of conflicts of interest, confidentiality, security for costs and adverse costs exposure.[1] The procedural orders in Daniel W. Kappes and Kappes, Cassiday & Associates v. Republic of Guatemala are useful because they address […]

Timing of Jurisdictional Objections in Arbitration

by

Arbitration rewards procedural vigilance. A party that believes a tribunal lacks jurisdiction usually cannot stay silent, contest the merits, and only later invoke the objection if the case turns unfavourable. Typical jurisdictional objections that may be raised in arbitration include: No valid arbitration agreement; A party is not bound by the arbitration agreement; The tribunal […]

Devas v. Antrix: Dutch Enforcement and the Limits of Seat-Based Annulment

by

With the Dutch Supreme Court’s 6 March 2026 dismissal of Antrix’s cassation challenge, attention has once again turned to one of the most closely watched India-linked arbitration disputes in recent years. The dismissal leaves in place the Hague Court of Appeal’s 17 December 2024 judgment in Devas Multimedia America Inc. v. Antrix Corporation Ltd., permitting […]

What Options Remain for Investor-State Arbitration Under the ECT?

by

This note deals with the current legal framework of investor-State arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty (the “ECT”). The landscape of the application of the ECT has become blurry after several major developments in recent years: withdrawals, modernisation of the ECT, not to mention the impact of the Komstroy decision,[1] which has by no means […]

UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators

by

The UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators in International Investment Dispute Resolution (the “UNCITRAL Code of Conduct”) recalibrates ethical expectations in investor-state dispute settlement. Adopted in 2023 under UN General Assembly Resolution 78/105 after six years of work in UNCITRAL Working Group III, it is a voluntary soft law instrument.[1] Accordingly, it sets recommended standards […]

Interpreting Treaties in Investment Arbitration

by

Interpreting treaties in investment arbitration is central to resolving disputes where the applicable international instruments are often complex and open to competing readings. Practical interpretation determines jurisdiction, scope of protection and ultimately the outcome of disputes. In a previous note, we outlined how investment tribunals approach treaty interpretation. In this note, we take a closer […]

Shareholder Claims for Reflective Loss in Investor-State Arbitration: An Overview

by

Reflective losses are indirect losses, such as a decrease in the value of the shares, suffered by shareholders as a result of harm to the company in which their shares are held.[1] Reflective losses differ from direct losses suffered by shareholders, which may occur through the seizure of shares or barriers to shareholder attendance of […]

Which Foreign Investors Could Sue Trump’s United States in Arbitration?

by

Since taking office for the second time, President Trump has unleashed a torrent of executive orders aimed at reshaping America’s legal and political landscape — from immigration and climate change to trade, civil rights, energy policy, and tariffs.[1] His unpredictable approach to governance has sparked domestic and international concerns, particularly among foreign investors who may […]