STATE IMMUNITY AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRAL AWARDS
This chapter begins by describing the regimes set forth for the enforcement of awards under the ICSID Convention and under the New York Convention. Though the routes each prescribes are different, each refers the prevailing party in a dispute to the municipal legal system(s) of State parties to the treaties in the event of a losing party's refusal to pay an award. Successful investors in investment arbitrations governed by either regime can thus run into difficulties in attempts to recover assets that are protected by municipal laws on sovereign immunity with respect to execution. The chapter illustrates the pitfalls investors can face both because of the protections States enjoy due to State immunity and the complexity of the interaction between the New York Convention and municipal State immunity laws. It serves to demonstrate Professor Schreuer's prescience with respect to the perennially intractable nature of State immunity with respect to enforcement.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.