By Marlon Meza

Abstract:  This paper will address the post–award remedies and procedures against ICSID awards, from a simple request of supplementation or error rectification (which the arbitration tribunal can resolve), through interpretation and revision requests, finally focusing on petitions for annulment that are settled by some ad hoc Committees − which are sometimes criticized for lack of coherence and uniformity. Plenty of debates have taken place regarding the nature of such annulments, even though the ICSID Convention clarifies that annulments are not appeals, and article 52 enshrines specific annulment grounds. This last statement helps qualify the annulment mechanism as an extraordinary remedy, different from the appeal. This does not mean that ad hoc Committees cannot revise—even in a restricted manner—the merits of awards. What they cannot do is modify them; their action must be limited to the declaration of an award’s invalidity or its denial. On the other hand, there cannot be automatic nullities, nor can decisions bear the discretional nature that some ad hoc Committees have held they possess in order to decide. Then, it is necessary to weigh the nullity grounds to avoid excesses and to ensure that decisions on annulments are rendered according to the most modern procedural tendencies. The credibility of the ICSID system could depend greatly on this in the future.

Read more here.