The Duty of Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest in Investment Arbitration Disputes

  • Katia Fach Gómez


This chapter offers some reflections on conflicts of interest in the international investment milieu and their relationship with the duty of disclosure. Special attention is paid to IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration, and its present and future relevance in the investment context. The chapter also focuses on three highly controversial issues of the contemporary ISDS system: repeat appointment, issue conflict and multiple hatting. The final aim of this Chapter is to put forward various proposals on the specific content that should be attributed to these issues in contexts such as ICSID, the ICS, and a possible MIC.


  1. Alliance for Justice (2015) More than 100 legal scholars call on Congress, administration to protect democracy and sovereignty in U.S. trade deals.
  2. Arias D (2018) Soft law rules in international arbitration: positive effects and legitimation of the IBA as a rule-maker. Indian J Arbitr Law 6(2):29–42Google Scholar
  3. Baker McKenzie (2017) Submissions to the ICSID Secretariat on amendments to the ICSID rules and regulations.
  4. Ball M (2005) Probity deconstructed: how helpful, really, are the new international bar association guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration? Arbitr Int 21(3):323–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernasconi-Osterwalder N, Brauch MD (2017) Is “Moonlighting” a problem? The role of ICJ judges in ISDS. International Institute for Sustainable Development, Winnipeg. Scholar
  6. Bernasconi-Osterwalder N, Johnson L, Marshall F (2010) Arbitrator independence and impartiality: examining the dual role of arbitrator and counsel. International Institute for Sustainable Development, Winnipeg. Scholar
  7. Brubaker JR (2008) The judge who knew too much: issue conflicts in international adjudication. Berkeley J Int Law 26(1):111–152Google Scholar
  8. Cinelli Moreira NF (2014) The arbitrator’s duty of disclosure analyzed through case-law: are the IBA guidelines on conflict of interest in international arbitration enough to create consistency? Revista de Arbitragem e Mediaçao 40:115–150Google Scholar
  9. Claussen K (2018) Tipping point challenges in international economic disputes. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 17(1):61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cleis MN (2017) The Independence and impartiality of ICSID arbitrators. Brill Nijhoff, LeidenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corporate Europe Observatory (2016) The zombie ISDS - rebranded as ICS, rights for corporations to sue states refuse to die.
  12. Cristani F (2014) Challenge and disqualification of arbitrators in international investment arbitration: an overview. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 13:153–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daele K (2012) Challenge and disqualification of arbitrators in international arbitration. Kluwer, Alphen aan den RijnGoogle Scholar
  14. Daele K (2014) Saint Gobain v. Venezuela and Blue Bank v. Venezuela. The standard for disqualifying arbitrators finally settled and lowered. ICSID Rev 29(2):296–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Witt Wijnen OLO, Voser N, Rao N (2004) Background information on the IBA guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration. Bus Law Int 5:433–458Google Scholar
  16. Dias Simoes F (2018) Hold on to your hat! Issue conflicts in the TTIP proposal for an investment court. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 17(1):98–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diaz-Candia H (2012) “Issue Conflict” in arbitration as apparently (un)seen in 2011 by a U.S. Court in STMicroelectronics vs. Credite Suisse Securities. Transnational Dispute Manag 9(3):1–10Google Scholar
  18. Dunoff JL, Pollack MA (2017) The Judicial Trilemma. Am J Int Law 111(2):225–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eberhardt P, Olivet C (2012) Corporate Europe observatory and the Transnational Institute, profiting from injustice. How law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fuelling an investment arbitration boom. The Transnational Institute, Amsterdam. Scholar
  20. EFILA (2016) Task force paper regarding the proposed International Court System.
  21. Feerick JD (2002) 1977 Code of Ethics for arbitrators: an outside perspective, the symposium: ethics in a world of mandatory arbitration. Ga State Univ Law Rev 18:907–925Google Scholar
  22. Fernández-Armesto J (2012) Counsel and arbitrator in investment arbitration: does the mixing of the roles nix neutrality? In: IBA Arbitration Day 2012.
  23. Fernández Pérez A (2018) Conflicts of interests of arbitrators in international law firms. Arbitr Int 34(1):1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. French Government (2015) Towards a new way to settle disputes between states and investors.
  25. Freyer DA, Bédard J (2004) The concept of ethical rules or the new IBA guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration. In: ADR & the Law, 21st. edn. Juris Publishing, Huntington, pp 225–244Google Scholar
  26. Fry JD, Stampalija JA (2014) Forged independence and impartiality: conflicts of interest of international arbitrators in investment disputes. Arbitr Int 30(2):189–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Giorgetti C (2015) The challenge and recusal of judges at the International Court of Justice. In: Giorgetti C (ed) Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals. Brill, Leiden, pp 3–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Giraldo-Carrillo N (2011) The repeat arbitrators’ issue: a subjective concept. Int Law Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional 19:75–106Google Scholar
  29. Griffith G, Kalderimis D (2016) “Pure” issue conflicts in Investment Treaty Arbitration. In: Caron DD et al (eds) Practising virtue, inside international arbitration. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 607–625Google Scholar
  30. Hollander P (2008) Arbitrators’ bias because of previous appointments. A civil law perspective. Transnational Dispute Manag 5(4):1–6Google Scholar
  31. Horn P (2014) A matter of appearances: arbitrator independence and impartiality in ICSID arbitration. J Law Bus 11(2):349–395Google Scholar
  32. Howard DM (2018) Creating consistency through a World Investment court. Fordham Int Law J 41(1):46Google Scholar
  33. Howse R (2015) “Courting the critics of investor-state dispute settlement: the EU proposal for a judicial system for investment disputes”.
  34. Howse R (last accessed in June 2018) Courting the critics of investor-state dispute settlement: the EU proposal for a judicial system for investment disputes.
  35. Hwang M, Lim K (2011) Issue conflict in ICSID arbitrations. Transnational Dispute Manag 8(5):1–33Google Scholar
  36. IBA Subcommittee on Investment Treaty Arbitration (2016) Report on the subcommittee on Investment Treaty Arbitration’s survey.
  37. IBA Arbitration Guidelines and Rules Subcommittee (2016) Report on the reception of the IBA arbitration soft law products.
  38. International Council for Commercial Arbitration (2016) Report of the ASIL-ICCA joint task force on issue conflicts in Investor-State Arbitration, The ICCA Reports No. 3.
  39. Investment Treaty Working Group (2016) Task force report on the investment court system proposal.
  40. Joelson MR (2015) A critique of the 2014 international bar association guidelines of conflicts of interest in international arbitration. Am Rev Int Arbitr 26(3):483–492Google Scholar
  41. Krajewski M (2014) Modalities for investment protection and ISDS in TTIP from a trade union perspective. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Bonn. Scholar
  42. Kuo H (2011) The issue of repeat arbitrators: is it a problem and how should the arbitration institutions respond? Contemp Asia Arbitr J 4(2):247–271Google Scholar
  43. Langford M, Behn D, Lie RH (2017) The revolving door in international investment arbitration. J Int Econ Law 20(2):301–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Law Council of Australia (2017) Potential rule amendments or improvements to the arbitration and conciliation procedures of ICSID, 6.
  45. Lawson DA (2005) Impartiality and independence of international arbitrators. ASA Bull 1:22–44Google Scholar
  46. Legum B (2005) Investor-State Arbitrator disqualified for pre-appointment statement on challenged measures. Arbitr Int 21(2):241–245. esp. p. 243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Levine J (2015) Late-in the-day arbitrator challenges and resignations. In: Giorgetti C (ed) Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals. Brill, Leiden, pp 247–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Longley N, Ngai J (2016) IBA guidelines on conflict of interest: the traffic lights flash amber. Mealey’s Int Arbitr Report 31(4):1–5Google Scholar
  49. Malmström C (2015) Blog Post, “Proposing an Investment Court System”.
  50. Mann H (2005) The Emperor’s clothes come off: a comment on Republic of Ghana v. Telekom Malasya Berhard, and the problem of arbitrator conflict of interest. Transnational Dispute Manag 2(1):1–7Google Scholar
  51. Mouawad C (2008) Issue conflicts in Investment Treaty Arbitration. Transnational Dispute Manag 5(4):1–14Google Scholar
  52. Mourre A, Fouret J (2015) Le chapitre X de l’accord économique et commercial global Canada-Union Européenne: une solution équilibrée au débat sur le recours à l’arbitrage dans le règlement des différends entre investisseurs et États? In: Heuzé V et al (eds) Mélanges en l’honneur du Professeur Pierre Mayer. LGDJ, Paris, pp 571–590Google Scholar
  53. Mullerat Obe R (2012) The IBA guidelines on conflicts of interest revisited. Another contribution to the revision of an excellent instrument, which needs a slight daltonism treatment. Spain Arbitr Rev 14:61–99Google Scholar
  54. Park W (2009) Arbitrator integrity: the transient and the permanent. San Diego Law Rev 46:629–647Google Scholar
  55. Paulsson J (2010) Moral hazard in international dispute resolution. ICSID Rev- Foreign Invest Law J 25(2):339–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Perry S (2012) Stockholm: the double-hat syndrome. Glob Arbitr Rev 7(2):43Google Scholar
  57. Ridderhof R (2016) Investment protection: ISDS or ICS. Peace Palace Library, The Hague. Scholar
  58. Rubins N, Lauterburg B (2010) Independence, impartiality and duty of disclosure in investment arbitration. In: Knahr C, Koller C, Rechberger W, Reinisch A (eds) Investment and commercial arbitration. Similarities and divergences. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague, pp 153–180Google Scholar
  59. Sands P (2012) Conflict and conflicts in Investment Treaty Arbitration: ethical standards for counsel. In: Rovine A (ed) Contemporary issues in international arbitration and mediation: the Fordham papers. Brill, New York, pp 28–49Google Scholar
  60. Sardinha E (2018) Party-appointed arbitrators no more: the EU-led investment tribunal system as an (Imperfect?) response to certain legitimacy concerns in Investor-State Arbitration. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 17(1):117–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schacherer S (2016) TPP, CETA and TTIP between innovation and consolidation-resolving investor-state disputes under Mega-regionals. J Int Dispute Settlement 7(3):628–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schill S (2014) The new journal of World Investment and Trade: arbitrator independence and academic freedom. J World Invest Trade 15:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Shetreet S (2003) Standards of conduct of international judges: outside activities. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 2:127–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sobota LA (2015) Repeat arbitrator appointments in international investment disputes. In: Giorgetti C (ed) Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals. Brill, Leiden, pp 293–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. The IBA Conflicts of Interest Subcommittee (2010) The IBA guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration: the first five years 2004–2009. Disput Resolut Int 4(1):1–52Google Scholar
  66. Titi C (2017) The European Union’s proposal for an international investment court: significance, innovations and challenges ahead. Transnational Dispute Manag 1:1–35Google Scholar
  67. UNCITRAL (2018) Report of the Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute settlement reform) on the work of its thirty-fifth session.
  68. UNCTAD (2015) World Investment Report 2015., p 152
  69. Van Harten G (2016) “Key flaws in the EC’s proposals for foreign investor in TTIP”. In: Osgoode legal studies research paper.
  70. Zamour R (2015) Issue conflicts and the reasonable expectation of an open mind: the challenge decision in Devas v. India and its impact. In: Giorgetti C (ed) Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals. Brill, Leiden, pp 227–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ziadé NG (2009) How many hats can a player wear: arbitrator, counsel and expert? ICSID Rev 24(1):49–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Legal and Arbitration References


    1. Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (2015) Project No. 83/15. Model Bilateral Investment Treaty with investor-state dispute settlement for industrial countries, giving consideration to the U.S.
    2. Kingdom of the Netherlands (2018) Netherlands draft model BIT.
    3. Kingdom of Norway (2015) Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and for the promotion and protection of investments.
    4. Southern African Development Community (2012) Model Bilateral Investment Treaty.

Arbitration Acts, Institutional Arbitration Rules, and Codes of Conduct

  1. ABA, AAA, CPR Institute (2004) Code of ethics for arbitrators in commercial disputes.
  2. CAM (2010c) Statement of independence of the arbitrator. Filling in notes.
  3. CAS (2010) Code of sports-related arbitration.
  4. CEA (last accessed in June 2018) Recommendations of the Spanish Arbitration Club regarding the independence and impartiality of the arbitrators.
  5. IBA (2004) Guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration.
  6. ICC (2017) Note to parties and arbitral tribunals on the conduct of the arbitration under the ICC rules of arbitration.
  7. KLRCA (2013) Revised code of conduct for arbitrator.
  8. SIAC (2015) Code of ethics for an arbitrator.

Legal Documents

  1. CJEU (2007) Code of conduct for members and former members of the court of justice of the European Union.
  2. CJEU (2016) Code of conduct for members and former members of the court of justice of the European Union.
  3. ICJ (1946) Statute of the ICJ.
  4. ILA Study Group on the Practice and Procedure of International Tribunals (2010) Hague principles on ethical standards for counsel appearing before international courts and tribunals.
  5. Institute of International Law (2011) Rhodes resolution of the institute of international law on the position of the international judge.
  6. International Association of Judicial Independence and World Peace (2008) Mount Scopus approved revised international standards of judicial independence.
  7. ICJ (2013) Practice directions.
  8. Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity (2002) Bangalore principles of judicial conduct.
  9. Study Group of the International Law Association on the Practice and Procedure of International Courts and Tribunals, in association with the Project on International Courts and Tribunals (2004) Burgh House Principles on the Independence of the International Judiciary.
  10. WTO (1994) Understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes.
  11. WTO (1996) Rules of conduct for the understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes. WT/DSB/RC/1 (96-5267),
  12. WTO (2014) Post-Employment Guidelines in respect of former Appellate Body Members and former Appellate Body Secretariat staff.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katia Fach Gómez
    • 1
  1. 1.Tenured Professor (Profesora Titular) at the Law SchoolUniversity of ZaragozaZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations