Public Interests, Private Disputes: Investment Arbitration and the Public Good

This paper seeks to investigate the bases for resistance to arbitration in general -and investor arbitration in particular- focusing on the way in which arbitral tribunals deal with notions of public interest and the public good. The paper hypothesises that while courts have within their terms of reference the capacity to consider notions of public interest, arbitral tribunals do not. It is this core difference in the scope of decision making between the two bodies that could render privately organised dispute resolution unsuitable for disputes that have public aspects, like investor-state disputes. The paper discusses the meaning of public interest and the public good as found in the literature. It then proceeds to consider how tribunals in the investment field have dealt with these concepts. This leads to a conclusion urging not abandonment of arbitration as a component of dispute resolution, but caution. It is argued that unchecked growth in private dispute resolution can threaten perceptions of legitimacy and democratic accountability. The paper adopts a socio-legal methodology in considering the effect of legal mechanisms on social and political phenomena. It is also informed by a law and economics methodology in addressing impacts of dispute resolution mechanisms on economic efficiency. The contribution of the paper rests on theorising motivations for resistance to private dispute resolution, a topical issue in light of the TTIP debate.

Digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice

This article discusses the use of digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The absence of specific Court rules and procedures for digital evidence (with the exception of Practice Direction IX bis) is not necessarily an obstacle to its production and evaluation before the ICJ, as the general evidentiary rules can also be applied to digital evidence. The article first looks at the rules on the production of documentary evidence and then examines the specific issues related to audiovisual evidence. Finally, it examines the admissibility of digital evidence unlawfully obtained by a litigant through unilateral transborder access to data. The article concludes that, even if specific regulation may be needed as to the specific way in which authenticity and accuracy of digital evidence are to be established, the particular facts of the case and the grounds of challenge can vary widely, and it is doubtful that any regulation could be sufficiently flexible to deal with this in advance.

Is there any room for the doctrine of fundamental rights of states in today's international law?

This article serves as a general substantive introduction to the special issue on the fundamental rights of states in international law. It introduces the concept in theoretical and doctrinal terms, and lays out the questions that will be addressed by the contributions to the special issue. These questions include: 1) What do attributes like ‘inherent’, ‘inalienable’ and ‘permanent’ mean with regard to state rights?; 2) Do they lead to identifying a unitary distinct category of fundamental rights of states?; 3) If so, what is their source and legal character?; 4) What are their legal implications, eg, when they come into conflict with other obligations of the right holder or with the actions of other states and international organisations?; and ultimately, 5) Is there still room in today’s international law for a doctrine of ‘fundamental’ rights of states? The article reviews the fundamental rights of states in positive law sources and in international legal scholarship, and identifies the reasons for a renaissance of attention for this doctrine.

A general framework for Business Process Modelling (BPM) based on Formal Temporal Theory with an application to Hospital Patient flows

Existing Workflow Management Systems (WFMSs) follow a pragmatic approach. They often use a proprietary modelling language with an intuitive graphical layout. However the underlying semantics lack a formal foundation. As a consequence, analysis issues, such as proving correctness i.e. soundness and completeness, and reliable execution are not supported at design level. This project will be using an applied ontology approach by formally defining key terms such as process, sub-process, action/task based on formal temporal theory. Current business process modelling (BPM) standards such as Business Process Modelling Notation (BPMN) and Unified Modelling Language (UML) Activity Diagram (AD) model their constructs with no logical basis. This investigation will contribute to the research and industry by providing a framework that will provide grounding for BPM to reason and represent a correct business process (BP). This is missing in the current BPM domain, and may result in reduction of the design costs and avert the burden of redundant terms used by the current standards. A graphical tool will be introduced which will implement the formal ontology defined in the framework. This new tool can be used both as a modelling tool and at the same time will serve the purpose of validating the model. This research will also fill the existing gap by providing a unified graphical representation to represent a BP in a logically consistent manner for the mainstream modelling standards in the fields of business and IT. A case study will be conducted to analyse a catalogue of existing ‘patient pathways’ i.e. processes, of King’s College Hospital NHS Trust including current performance statistics. Following the application of the framework, a mapping will be conducted, and new performance statistics will be collected. A cost/benefits analysis report will be produced comparing the results of the two approaches.