MOST FAVORED NATION TREATMENT OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS & INVESTMENT ARBITRATION IN CHINA

Multiple Methods of Resolving Disputes Between States and Foreign Investors Dr Alexandra Koutoglidou Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Multiplicity A pragmatic concept Scope and origins of multiplicity Point of reference: The investment dispute

Possible Scenarios of Multiplicity Parallel Procedures Multi party procedures lato sensu: Different Claimants vs/ the same Respondent State When the parties in dispute are different When the causes of action are different

Possible Means of Handling Parallel Procedures The “fork in the road” clause The waiver clause The principle of lis pendens An Appellate Court?

Successive Procedures Investment arbitration following a national court’s final award A denial of justice claim The award of a national court as the source of an investment treaty dispute

Possible means of handling successive procedures The “fork in the road clause” The principle of “res judicata” An Appellate Court?

Multiplicity under Criticism For pragmatic reasons: Waste of public resources The cost of compensation

Multiplicity under Criticism For legitimacy related reasons: Why a special treatment for investors? Risk of conflicting awards Credibility/Authority of the system

Conclusions How justified is the legitimacy criticism? Are different awards always and necessarily conflicting awards? Efficient means of managing multiplicity Future prospects