What you need to know regarding the ICSID third draft of rule changes

28 August 2019
Author: JHA

On 16 August 2019, ICSID released its latest proposals for amendment of its procedural rules for the resolution of international investment disputes. The key changes are:

  1. Expanding the requirements as to what should be included in a Request for ICSID Arbitration (including an estimate of the damages sought, an indication that the requesting party has complied with the conditions of the instrument of consent for submissions of the dispute). This may require a party to state whether, for example, any provisions regarding limitation periods or cooling-off periods have been complied with.
  2. A move towards the electronic filing of documents, rather than paper filing.
  3. More comprehensive provisions regarding the disclosure of the details of third-party funding (which now includes a donation or a grant).
  4. Document discovery is not automatic the Tribunal should consider whether to have discovery and its scope in the first session.
  5. A provision on security for costs, requiring tribunals to consider all relevant circumstances before deciding whether to order security for costs – including the party’s ability and willingness to comply with an adverse decision on costs, any effect of providing security for costs on the party’s ability to pursue a claim and its conduct. The involvement of a funder may be raised as a relevant circumstance but is not enough in and of itself to warrant an order for security for costs.
  6. A provision that consent to publish the Award shall be deemed to have been given if no party objects in writing to such publication within 60 days after the dispatch.
  7. New guidelines for determining confidential and protected information.

ICSID Member States are meeting in November 2019 to consult on the latest draft proposals. Amendments to the ICSID Convention Rules require the approval of two-thirds of Member States, and a simple majority in the case of the Additional Facility Rules, Fact-Finding, and Mediation Rules.

Return to List of Articles by UK Lawyers on Tax Disputes, Tax Litigation, HMRC Tax Appeal Return to Listings
Left Button on Tax Dispute & Tax Litigation Lawyers in London

Our Insights

Insights from UK Tax Dispute Lawyers & HMRC Tax litigation

JHA ranked in top tier again in Legal 500 UK 2025

We are happy to announce that JHA's Tax Disputes Team has again been ranked as Tier 1 by Legal 500 today, a ranking we have proudly achieved every year since we began in 2013. A special congratulations to Graham Aaronson KC who has again been recognised in the Hall of Fame category, Iain MacWhannell (ranked as a Leading Partner) and Mei Wong (ranked as a Leading Associate).

This is the latest successful ranking, following previous top-tier rankings in Chambers UK Legal Guide 2024 and Chambers High Net Worth Guide 2024.

Read More
Insights from UK Tax Dispute Lawyers & HMRC Tax litigation

Armour Veterinary Group v HMRC – Warning for Partnership Personnel Changes?

In this decision, the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (“FTT”) dismissed an appeal against discovery assessments which disallowed amortisation relief claimed by the Appellant company for three types of goodwill acquired from a partnership. The decision examined the applicability of each of the circumstances set out in s882 CTA 2009 before concluding none of them had been satisfied. It also provided guidance on the meaning of carrying on a business pursuant to s884 CTA 2009. In rejecting the appeal, the FTT reached a number of key conclusions:

  1. partners can potentially rebut the presumption that individual partners do not own the goodwill of the business (in whole or part) by expressly recording the division in a partnership agreement;
  2. whether a partner is an equity or salaried partner has no bearing on whether they can be treated as carrying on the business for the purpose of s884;
  3. when determining whether and when a partner carries on a business, the FTT will consider, inter alia, (1) if they are in a partnership as per the definition in s1 of the Partnership Act 1890 and (2) their role in the day-to-day running of the practice;
  4. a fundamental aspect of the self-assessment regime is that taxpayers must ensure that they retain adequate records (backed up by an external valuation as relevant in the case of a goodwill transfer) sufficient to support the information provided in their returns, including evidence to support claims made for relief.

Read More

Right Button on Tax Dispute & Tax Litigation Lawyers in London