Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Convention stipulates that any request for interpretation of the award by the parties
shall be submitted to Secretary-General. If possible, the original tribunal will deal
with the award again. Art. 51 of the ICSID Convention includes the rules and
requirements for a revision of the award. The deadline for a revision is 3 years after
the award was rendered (Art. 51(2) of the ICSID Convention).
Art. 52 of the ICSID Convention deals with the question of annulment. Art. 52
(1) lists all the possible reasons for an annulment request in letters (a) to (e). In a
normal case, an application for annulment must be made no later than 120 days after
the award was rendered, Art. 52(2) ICSID Convention. In the case of corruption, the
deadline is 120 days after the discovery of corruption, according to Art. 52(2) of the
second alternative ICSID Convention. Pursuant to Art. 52(3) of the ICSID Con-
vention, a new tribunal (annulment tribunal) is going to be set up. The annulment
tribunal can decide that the award stays in force (Art. 52(5) ICSID Convention) or
annuls it and submits it to a new tribunal, if requested by the parties (Art. 52(6) of
the ICSID Convention).
Parties frequently resubmit the same case that one ICSID tribunal has already
finished to “ICSID tribunals” again for new investment arbitration.
326
However,
interpretations of annulment reasons in Art. 52 ICSID Convention happen in a
narrow and reluctant way.
327
There are increasing numbers of annulment cases,
which illustrates that the parties were not happy with the outcome.
328
Others
authors claim that only 7.4 % of all annulment cases are successful.
329
This
makes it quite difficult to talk about an increasing amount of annulments. There
is support for this view.
330
Despite certain drawbacks, there is a wide recognition and enforcement of
ICSID awards among states.
331
The only comparable feature of other arbitration
tribunals is the award review within the ICC. Nevertheless, it does not quite
compare to the possibility of annulment. If parties use the annulment option in a
reasonable way and ICSID tribunals decide in an understandable and correct way, it
is an enrichment of international arbitration law. Yet, it can be a double-edged
sword if parties abuse the annulment option. This causes the arbitration to last
longer, thus creating a lot of additional costs. It is also difficult to prove that a party
is abusing its rights. Down to the present day, there have only been a few cases
repeatedly subject to annulment processes. Abusive behavior from any party would
automatically cast doubt on their credibility. Both parties could not risk jeopardiz-
ing their credibility within the international community.
326
Jagusch et al. (
2010
), 75 (98).
327
Tietje (
2005
), 47 (57).
328
UNCTAD (
2010b
), 15.
329
Saunders and Salomon (
2007
), 467 (474); Comparable numbers for 2006, in: Sch
€
obener and
Markert (
2006
), 65 (105).
330
Jagusch et al. (
2010
), 75 (98).
331
Alexandrov (
2009
), 322 (323) and (329).
