Abstract
Parallel litigation has become a recurrent issue in foreign investment disputes. International tribunals have consistently addressed the issue through the essentially civil law institution of lis pendens. The article argues that lis pendens has no legitimacy to be the tool dealing with parallel litigation in an international setting. To begin with, lis pendens is based on the assumption that the competing adjudicators are legitimate and comparable whereas in many situations this will not be the case. Moreover, comparative international civil procedure shows that, even when the competing adjudicators can be meaningfully compared, a more flexible remedy would be more legitimate and indeed appropriate.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
