17 06 / 16

Investment Arbitration is waiting for reform

The present and future of investment arbitration has been considered at SPIEF. The interview of K.I. Rusakomsky for "Attorneys New Newspaper".

A panel session "The Present and Future of Investment Arbitration: it’s time for a change" was held on June 16th at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

The moderators of the session were the Minister of Justice Alexander Konovalov and partner of White & Case David Goldberg. The discussion was attended by Jacomijn van Haersolte-van Hof, Director General of the London Court of International Arbitration, Andrey Lisitsyn-Svetlanov, Director of the Institute of State and Law of RAS, Sophie Nappert, independent arbitrator for international disputes and Anthony Hilton, financial editor of Evening Standard.

As the managing partner of law company “Paradigma” Kliment Rusakomsky said to the correspondent of "Attorneys New Newspaper", two opposite points of view on the investment arbitration were presented during the consideration. "The foreign colleagues held the position that it is definitely necessary. It was noted that through the institution of investment arbitration it is possible to consider a case quickly, confidentially and independently, and protect the party from abuse of power, which is possible in any country ", – he said.

According to Kliment Rusakomsky the second point of view, which was announced by representatives of the russian side, is that investment arbitration in its present form has exhausted itself. "Initially, investment arbitration was created as an instrument for the protection of western investors in the developed countries. But over time, it began to work against the western countries. It is confirmed by the fact that there is an active resistance in Europe to the decisions of international arbitration under the pretext that this institution is not sufficiently regulated by the state, arbitrators are not professionals, and so on ", – said the managing partner of "Paradigma" law company adding that at his point of view the investment arbitration is necessary, because in the event of a dispute it gives a theoretical opportunity to reach a consensus quickly.

In conclusion, participants reached a compromise: the investment arbitration is necessary, but it should be reformed by joint efforts of the international community.