Abstract
The purpose of the present article is to study the foundations of ICSID tribunals’ power to issue interim measures aimed at stopping domestic criminal proceedings and the effects of these measures on ongoing litigations. Starting from an analysis of the arbitrators’ power to issue binding provisional measures and of the requirements that ICSID case law has established for the issuance of orders aimed at suspending criminal domestic trials, the article then analyses the recent order for provisional measures issued in the Hydro case, a dispute concerning the alleged violation by Albania of certain standards of treatment set forth in the bilateral investment treaty of 1991 between Italy and Albania. This order, indeed, seems to have lowered the threshold for interfering with domestic criminal proceedings and its execution has shown the problems related to the enforcement of such measures. The article then discusses the effects of ICSID interim orders before the courts of recipient States and of third States.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
