Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 AUGUST 2026

Investment Arbitration: The Case Against A Standing Investment Court

Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Contributor
Aceris Law

Aceris Law

Aceris Law is a leading boutique international arbitration law firm. It provides the...

View firm profile
Explore more from Aceris Law

The debate over replacing investor-State arbitration with a permanent standing investment court has moved from theory to practice, with UNCITRAL Working Group III now considering detailed draft statutes. While proponents argue that a permanent bench would reduce repeat-player incentives and improve consistency, critics warn that concentrating appointment power in States' hands, eliminating party participation in tribunal selection, and creating hierarchical appellate structures may introduce new problems of

GlobalLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Author LinkedIn connections

A standing investment court is a permanent tribunal currently being conceived by States to decide investor-State disputes. Its members would be appointed in advance, and cases would be assigned to them from a fixed bench. The concern is that this could concentrate decision-making power in a small group of State-appointed judges while reducing the parties’ role in choosing who decides their dispute.

A. Introduction

The debate over a standing investment court is no longer abstract. In March 2026, UNCITRAL Working Group III considered separate draft statutes for a permanent first-instance tribunal and a permanent appellate tribunal, together with a paper on the structure and design of a standing mechanism. The details remain under negotiation, but the basic choice is clear: retain case-by-case tribunals or move toward a permanent bench appointed in advance by participating States.1

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Can Arbitrators Ask Artificial Intelligence For Its View On Legal Issues?

Artificial intelligence is increasingly being used in international arbitration for legal research, document review, and drafting. However, its use becomes difficult to assess when an arbitrator turns to AI not merely to process information, but to obtain a view on a legal issue that the tribunal must decide. This article examines emerging guidance on whether arbitrators can ask AI for its opinion on legal questions and explores the boundaries between AI as a research tool and AI as a decision-maker.
SwitzerlandLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

Perjury And False Evidence In International Arbitration

Witness evidence plays a critical role in international arbitration, but what happens when a witness deliberately lies? This comprehensive analysis examines how different jurisdictions handle perjury and false testimony in arbitration proceedings, exploring the criminal liability, procedural consequences, and potential impact on arbitral awards across Switzerland, England, France, UAE, India, and Singapore.
SwitzerlandLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

Behind The Curtain: A Step-by-Step Guide To SIAC Arbitration Under The 2025 Rules

The 2025 SIAC Arbitration Rules introduce significant procedural innovations including Streamlined and Expedited Procedures, Preliminary Determination mechanisms, and enhanced Emergency Arbitrator frameworks. Understanding how these rules operate in practice—from initial filing through tribunal constitution, evidence presentation, and final award—is essential for parties navigating SIAC arbitration effectively.
SingaporeLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

Hong Kong Sets Aside USD 481.6 Million Award: The Duty To Address The Defence Actually Advanced

The Hong Kong Court of First Instance set aside a USD 481.6 million arbitral award after finding that the tribunal failed to address the actual estoppel defence presented by the respondents. The court distinguished between a tribunal rejecting arguments on their merits versus failing to determine the essential issue actually advanced, emphasizing that tribunals must address the specific case presented rather than a materially different question.
Hong KongLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

Can Arbitrators Ask Artificial Intelligence For Its View On Legal Issues?

Artificial intelligence is increasingly being used in international arbitration for legal research, document review, and drafting. However, its use becomes difficult to assess when an arbitrator turns to AI not merely to process information, but to obtain a view on a legal issue that the tribunal must decide. This article examines emerging guidance on whether arbitrators can ask AI for its opinion on legal questions and explores the boundaries between AI as a research tool and AI as a decision-maker.
SwitzerlandLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

A FRANDly Forum? The Growing Role Of Arbitration In SEP Disputes

Standard-essential patent disputes reveal a fundamental tension between territorial patent rights and global technology markets. While patents are enforced nationally, the standards they protect operate across borders, triggering parallel proceedings in multiple jurisdictions. FRAND arbitration offers a potentially coherent alternative by allowing parties to place international SEP portfolios before a single specialist tribunal, though questions of consent, validity, competition law and enforceability compl
United KingdomIntellectual Property
Aceris Law
Aceris Law
Article

Saudi Construction Arbitration In Practice: Claims And Remedies Under The Civil Transactions Law And The Enforcement Of Awards

Saudi Arabia's Civil Transactions Law has transformed construction arbitration by codifying rules on variations, payment, delay, defects and termination. With construction disputes representing 47% of SCCA cases in 2025, understanding how these statutory provisions interact with arbitration procedures and enforcement mechanisms has become essential for parties navigating complex project disputes in the Kingdom.
Saudi ArabiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Aceris Law
Aceris Law