Study Of Clauses Limiting Parallel Proceedings In International Investment Arbitration

International investment dispute settlement mechanisms have shown many new developments in recent years,inducing parallel proceedings.The coexistence of multiple remedial procedures,the expanded interpretation of the concepts of investor and investment by arbitral tribunals,the unclear provisions of host country remedies and the abuse of most-favoured-nation treatment clauses have led to parallel proceedings in international investment arbitration,as investors can initiate two or more dispute settlement mechanisms sequentially or simultaneously.The occurrence of parallel proceedings can lead to a waste of judicial resources and serious consequences of inconsistent decisions,and thus the international community is also actively exploring how to regulate parallel proceedings by providing for provisions to limit parallel proceedings under the existing dispute resolution framework.For China,as its role in international investment changes and the pace of updating BITs accelerates,the number of international investment arbitration cases against China will gradually increase in the future,and the possibility of parallel proceedings will also increase significantly;in addition,the current international investment arbitration cases involving China also demonstrate the real risk of China facing parallel proceedings.Therefore,it is important to study the clauses limiting parallel proceedings in IIAs.Apart from the introduction and concluding remarks,this thesis is divided into four parts as follows:First,the concept of parallel proceedings in international investment arbitration is defined.In this section,the meaning of parallel proceedings is first conceptually defined,leading to the concept of parallel proceedings in international investment arbitration,and then its manifestations are described from an outreach perspective.Secondly,the root causes of parallel proceedings in international investment arbitration are analysed,as well as the negative effects they can have.The causes of parallel proceedings include the coexistence of multiple dispute resolution methods,the lack of clarity in the concepts of investment and investor,the abuse of most-favoured-nation clauses and the exhaustion of local remedies;and then a detailed analysis of the negative effects of parallel proceedings,including the waste of judicial resources and the inconsistency of awards,in order to clarify the need and importance of measures to regulate parallel proceedings.Thirdly,the existing international provisions used to limit parallel proceedings are described.This thesis focuses on two types of clauses that limit parallel proceedings:those that regulate parallel proceedings between courts and arbitral tribunals,including the exhaustion of local remedies principle,the fork-in-the-road clause and the wavier clause;and those that regulate parallel proceedings between arbitral tribunals and arbitral tribunals,mainly including the consolidation provision.This thesis focuses on the provisions of these clauses in IIAs,their application in dispute settlement proceedings and analyses their regulatory effect.Finally,suggestions are made to improve the provisions on limiting parallel proceedings in IIAs entered into by China.This thesis introduces the current status of China’s legislation and the application of the clause limiting parallel proceedings,and focuses on the problems with the clause applied in Hela case and the possible consequences thereof,suggesting that the principle of exhaustion of local remedies should be reintroduced by drawing on the provisions in the USMCA;or moving from a fork-in-the-road clause to a waiver clause avoiding investors using the arbitral tribunal’s strict interpretation of the triple identity test to circumvent the application of the fork-in-the-road clause and thereby obtain duplicative relief;it is suggested that China should include the consolidation provision in future IIAs,as a means of regulating parallel proceedings between arbitral tribunals and arbitral tribunals,improving procedural efficiency and preventing inconsistent awards.