INTERIM AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES

1. ‘One significant area where there are differing views amongst a number of supposedly ‘pro-arbitration’ states is whether or not an arbitration award that has been set aside by the national courts at the seat of the arbitration can then be enforced in another jurisdiction. Indeed,despite a number of high-profile cases in various jurisdictions, this issue is far from settled.’Discuss, with reference to the theoretical perspectives underlying this case law. 2. With reference to examples from two or more legal systems, critically assess the relationship between courts and arbitral tribunals in the context of the grant of interim or protective measures. 3. “The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration … are one of the few rocks on the tumultuous seas that are international arbitration. They are near universally adopted by arbitrarily tribunals either to guide their thinking or more formally to govern the process.” Ashford, The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration: A Guide (CUP 2013) Evaluate the factors underpinning the success of the above-mentioned IBA Rules. 4. There are “three main hypotheses about the functional effects of investment arbitration. They form three models or candidate-theories of the functions that investment arbitration may empirically have: (1) investment arbitration serves to champion and strengthen the interests of economic powers of developed states to the detriment of political powers of developing states, in a form of neo-colonialism; (2) investment arbitration serves to make up for deficient rule of law in the host state; and (3) investment arbitration serves to strengthen the international rule of law.” Thomas Schultz and Cédric Dupont, “Investment Arbitration: Promoting the Rule of Law or Over-empowering Investors? A Quantitative Empirical Study” (2014) 25:4 Eur J Int Law 1147-1168.