近代ICSID判例法中的复议权

Tobia Cantelmo
{"title":"近代ICSID判例法中的复议权","authors":"Tobia Cantelmo","doi":"10.1163/22119000-12340040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present article deals with the issue of the power of reconsideration of ICSID tribunals. In 2014, the majority in ConocoPhillips v. Venezuela rejected Respondent’s Request for Reconsideration, ruling that an interim decision had res judicata effect. However, in a powerful dissent in that case, Professor Abi-Saab argued that the tribunal in fact possessed an inherent power of reconsideration. The following year, the ICSID tribunal in Perenco v. Ecuador unanimously endorsed the reasoning of the majority in ConocoPhillips. While judicial economy is potentially undermined if interim decisions can later be revisited, the question is how to strike the proper balance between judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness. As this article shows, the most sensible position, recently taken by the ICSID tribunal in SCB HK v. TANESCO – and one that still promotes judicial economy – is to recognize a limited power of reconsideration during the period until a final judgment has been rendered.","PeriodicalId":163787,"journal":{"name":"The journal of world investment and trade","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Inherent Power of Reconsideration in Recent ICSID Case Law\",\"authors\":\"Tobia Cantelmo\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22119000-12340040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present article deals with the issue of the power of reconsideration of ICSID tribunals. In 2014, the majority in ConocoPhillips v. Venezuela rejected Respondent’s Request for Reconsideration, ruling that an interim decision had res judicata effect. However, in a powerful dissent in that case, Professor Abi-Saab argued that the tribunal in fact possessed an inherent power of reconsideration. The following year, the ICSID tribunal in Perenco v. Ecuador unanimously endorsed the reasoning of the majority in ConocoPhillips. While judicial economy is potentially undermined if interim decisions can later be revisited, the question is how to strike the proper balance between judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness. As this article shows, the most sensible position, recently taken by the ICSID tribunal in SCB HK v. TANESCO – and one that still promotes judicial economy – is to recognize a limited power of reconsideration during the period until a final judgment has been rendered.\",\"PeriodicalId\":163787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of world investment and trade\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of world investment and trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of world investment and trade","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本条款涉及争端解决中心各法庭的重审权问题。2014年,康菲诉委内瑞拉案驳回了被告的复议请求,裁定临时决定具有既判力。然而,在该案的一项强有力的异议中,阿比-萨博教授辩称,仲裁庭实际上拥有固有的复议权力。次年,ICSID法庭在Perenco诉厄瓜多尔案中一致支持康菲公司案中多数人的推理。虽然如果临时判决可以在以后重新审理,可能会破坏司法经济,但问题是如何在司法效率和基本公平之间取得适当的平衡。正如本文所示,ICSID仲裁庭最近在SCB香港诉TANESCO案中所采取的最明智的立场——也是一个仍在提倡司法节约的立场——是承认在作出最终判决之前的一段时间内,重审的权力是有限的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Inherent Power of Reconsideration in Recent ICSID Case Law
The present article deals with the issue of the power of reconsideration of ICSID tribunals. In 2014, the majority in ConocoPhillips v. Venezuela rejected Respondent’s Request for Reconsideration, ruling that an interim decision had res judicata effect. However, in a powerful dissent in that case, Professor Abi-Saab argued that the tribunal in fact possessed an inherent power of reconsideration. The following year, the ICSID tribunal in Perenco v. Ecuador unanimously endorsed the reasoning of the majority in ConocoPhillips. While judicial economy is potentially undermined if interim decisions can later be revisited, the question is how to strike the proper balance between judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness. As this article shows, the most sensible position, recently taken by the ICSID tribunal in SCB HK v. TANESCO – and one that still promotes judicial economy – is to recognize a limited power of reconsideration during the period until a final judgment has been rendered.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信