Two Bites at the Cherry: Parallel Proceedings Before the European Court of Human Rights and Arbitral Tribunals
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F21%3A10440884" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/21:10440884 - isvavai.cz</a>
Result on the web
—
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
—
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Two Bites at the Cherry: Parallel Proceedings Before the European Court of Human Rights and Arbitral Tribunals
Original language description
The proliferation of international courts and tribunals and their expanding jurisprudence in distinct fields of public international law has received mixed reactions. On one hand, a more frequent resort to international adjudicative mechanisms is cited as a sign of legislating international relations and a recognition of the effective enforcement of international legal obligations. At the same time, the increase in the number of dispute settlement fora raises serious concerns regarding forum shopping, double recovery and contradictory decisions in legally and factually similar cases that might further undermine the unity of public international law. Despite the risks related to the existence of concurrent jurisdictions, dispute settlement provisions in international treaties are frequently silent on the effects of potential parallel proceedings. With reference to Article 38(1)(c) of the ICJ Statute, international adjudicative bodies have bridged these gaps by relying on the general legal principles of lis pendens and res judicata. Their interpretation is however far from being uniform. These divergences can be demonstrated also in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and international arbitral tribunals that are increasingly used as viable alternatives by foreign investors seeking damages for host states' sovereign interferences. The danger of parallel adjudication of similar cases became most evident in the Yukos saga where three arbitral tribunals operating under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules and the European Court of Human Rights rendered contradictory decisions in cases with the same factual background in only a couple of weeks' time. This paper revisits the practice of these judicial and arbitral bodies and explores their distinct approach to the interpretation of lis pendens and res judicata principles in their decisions.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
C - Chapter in a specialist book
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
50501 - Law
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2021
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Book/collection name
70th anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights
ISBN
978-3-946915-66-9
Number of pages of the result
10
Pages from-to
131-140
Number of pages of the book
211
Publisher name
rw&w Science & New Media Passau-Berlin-Prague
Place of publication
Praha
UT code for WoS chapter
—