Arcuri A ., Violi F .: Reforming ISDS: Changing (Almost) Everything, So That Everything Stays the Same?, September 26, 2019, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3459961.
Google Scholar
Behn D., L audal B erge T., L angford M.: Poor States or Poor Governance? Explaining Outcomes in Investment Treaty Arbitration. „Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business” 2018, 38.
Google Scholar
Bonnitcha J.: Assessing the Impacts of Investment Treaties: Overview of the evidence. International Insttitute for Sustainable Development (IISD) Report, September 2017, https://www.iisd.org/sites/default/files/publications/assessing-impacts-investment-treaties.pdf.
Google Scholar
Brower C h.N., S teven L .A.: Who Then Should Judge? Developing the International Rule of Law under NAFTA. Chapter 11. „Chicago Journal of International Law” 2002, 2.
Google Scholar
Carim X.: International Investment Agreements and Africa’s Structural Transformation: A Perspective from South Africa. In: Rethinking Bilateral Investment Treaties: Critical Issues and Policy Choices. Eds. K. Singh, B. Ilge. Amsterdam—New Delphi 2016, https://www.somo.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Rethinking-bilateral-investment-treaties.pdf.
Google Scholar
Cosmos J.: Legitimacy Crisis in Investor — State International Arbitration System: A Critique on the Suggested Solutions & the Proposal on the Way Forward. „International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications” 2014, 4.
Google Scholar
Czech K.: Dowody i postępowanie dowodowe w międzynarodowym arbitrażu handlowym oraz inwestycyjnym. Zagadnienia wybrane. Warszawa 2017.
Google Scholar
De Luca A.: UNCITRAL Working Group III: Counterclaims in ISDS — Challenges and Prospects in Light of the UNCITRAL Reform Process, March 28, 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/03/28/uncitral-working-group-iii-counterclaims-in-isds-challenges-and-prospects-in-light-of-the-uncitral-reform-process/?doing_wp_cron=1592665294.8821029663085937500000.
Google Scholar
Diamond N.J., Duggal K.A.N.: ISDS Reform and Advancing All „Generations” of Human Rights, June 17, 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/06/17/isds-reform-and-advancingall-generations-of-human-rights/?doing_wp_cron=1592658056.1291019916534423828125.
Google Scholar
Dias Simões F.: UNCITRAL Working Group III: Would an Investment Court De-politicize ISDS?, March 25, 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/03/25/uncitral-working-groupiii-would-an-investment-court-de-politicize-isds/?doing_wp_cron=1592664439.3457798957824707031250.
Google Scholar
Djajić S.: Searching for purpose: Critical assessment of teleological interpretation of treaties in investment arbitration, International Review of Law, Issue 3 — Special issue of International Investment Treaties, 2016, https://journals.qu.edu.qa/index.php/IRL/article/view/1217/658.
Google Scholar
Giorgetti Ch.: ICSID and UNCITRAL Publish the Anticipated Draft of the Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, May 2, 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/05/02/icsid-and-uncitral-publish-the-anticipated-draft-of-the-code-of-conduct-for-adjudicators-in-investor-state-dispute-settlement/?doing_wp_cron=1592684708.7732639312744140625000.
Google Scholar
Jeżewski M.: Międzynarodowe prawo inwestycyjne. Warszawa 2019.
Google Scholar
Kałduński M.: Ochrona uzasadnionych oczekiwań w międzynarodowym prawie inwestycyjnym. Toruń 2019.
Google Scholar
Kułaga Ł.: Międzynarodowa ochrona środowiska a swoboda handlu. W: Swoboda handlu międzynarodowego w prawie międzynarodowym. Red. C. Mik, M. Jeżewski. Warszawa 2014.
Google Scholar
Kułaga Ł.: Międzynarodowy arbitraż inwestycyjny z perspektywy zasady rządów prawa. W: Arbitraż w prawie międzynarodowym. Red. C. Mik. Warszawa, C.H. Beck, 2014.
Google Scholar
Kułaga Ł.: Ochrona praw człowieka w międzynarodowym arbitrażu inwestycyjnym. „Forum Prawnicze” 2014, nr 1.
Google Scholar
Kułaga Ł.: Prawo państwa do regulacji a międzynarodowe prawo inwestycyjne: w kierunku zmiany paradygmatu. „Problemy Współczesnego Prawa Międzynarodowego, Europejskiego i Porównawczego” 2019, T. 17.
Google Scholar
Kułaga Ł.: W kierunku zmiany paradygmatu międzynarodowych porozumień inwestycyjnych. „Forum Prawnicze” 2016, nr 5.
Google Scholar
Langford M ., Behn D., Létourneau-T remblay L .: Empirical perspectives on investment arbitration: What do we know? Does it matter? ISDS Academic Forum Working Group 7 Paper, https://www.cids.ch/images/Documents/Academic-Forum/7_Empirical_perspectives_-_WG7.pdf.
Google Scholar
Langford M ., Behn D., Lie R .: The Revolving Door in International Investment Arbitration. „Journal of International Economic Law” 2017, 20, https://academic.oup.com/jiel/article/20/2/301/3859188.
Google Scholar
Menon T., Issac G.: Developing Country Opposition to an Investment Court: Could State-State Dispute Settlement be an Alternative? Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/02/17/developing-country-opposition-investment-court-state-state-dispute-settlement-alternative/.
Google Scholar
Mohamadieh K.: The Future of Investor-State Dispute Settlement Deliberated at UNCITRAL: Unveiling a Dichotomy between Reforming and Consolidating the Current Regime, „Investment Policy Brief” 2019, 16, https://www.southcentre.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IPB16_The-Future-of-ISDS-Deliberated-at-UNCITRAL_EN.pdf.
Google Scholar
Monebhurrun N.: Is investment arbitration an appropriate venue for environmental issues? A Latin American perspective, Revista De Direito Inernacional. „Brazilian Journal of International Law” 2013, 10.
Google Scholar
Nica A.: UNCITRAL Working Group III: One Step Closer to a Multilateral Investment Court?, March 24, 2020, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/03/24/uncitral-working-group-iii-onestep-closer-to-a-multilateral-investment-court/?doing_wp_cron=1592656079.5285549163818359375000.
Google Scholar
Puig S., Shaffer G.: Imperfect Alternatives: Institutional Choice and the Reform of Investment Law. „The American Journal of International Law” 2018, 112.
Google Scholar
Pyka M.: Pojęcie inwestycji w międzynarodowym arbitrażu inwestycyjnym. Warszawa 2018.
Google Scholar
Roberts A.: Incremental, Systematic, ad Paradigmatic Reform of Investor-State Arbitration. „American Journal of International Law” 2018, 112.
Google Scholar
Roberts A.: The Shifting Landscape of Investor-State Arbitration: Loyalists, Reformists, Revolutionaries and Undecideds. „International Economic Law and Policy Blog”, 15 June 2017, https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-shifting-landscape-of-investor-state-arbitration-loyalists-reformists-revolutionaries-andundecideds/.
Google Scholar
Roberts A ., John T .S.: UNCITRAL and ISDS Reform: Plausible Folk Theories, February 13, 2020, https://www.ejiltalk.org/uncitral-and-isds-reform--plausible-folk-theories/.
Google Scholar
Roberts A ., John T.S.: UNCITRAL and ISDS Reforms: What Makes Something Fly?, February 11, 2020, https://www.ejiltalk.org/uncitral-and-isdsreforms-what-makes-something-fly/.
Google Scholar
Rönnelid L.: Research Report: An Evaluation of the Proposed Multilateral Investment Court System, An independent report commissioned by the European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) in the European Parliament 2018, https://www.guengl.eu/content/uploads/2019/03/MIC_vRET_web_FINAL2.pdf.
Google Scholar
Sadowski W.: Protection of the Rule of Law in the European Union Through Investment Treaty Arbitration: Is Judicial Monopolism the Right Response to Illiberal Tendencies in Europe? „Common Market Law Review” 2018, 55.
Google Scholar
Schultz T ., Dupont C .: Investment Arbitration: Promoting the Rule of Law Or Over-Empovering Investors? A Quantitative Empirical Study. „The European Journal of International Law” 2015, vol. 25, no. 4, http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/25/4/2551.pdf.
Google Scholar
T iti C.: Who’s Afraid of Reform? Beware the Risk of Fragmentation. „American Journal of International Law Unbound” 2018, 112, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/whos-afraidof-reform-beware-the-risk-of-fragmentation/5918DD3553CE666F2B817823C2063339.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G.: Five Justifications for Investment Treaties: A Critical Discussion. „Trade, Law and Development” 2010, 2.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G.: Investment Treaty Arbitration and Public Law. Oxford University Press 2007.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G.: Investment Treaty Arbitration. Procedural Fairness, and the Rule of Law. In: Investment Law and Comparative Public Law. Ed. S.W. S chill. O xford 2010.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G., Kelsey J., Schneiderman D.: Phase 2 of the UNCITRAL ISDS Review: Why ‘Other Matters’ Really Matter (2019). All Papers 328, https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article-=1335&context=all_papers.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G., Malysheuski P.: Who Has Benefited Financially from Investment Treaty Arbitration? An Evaluation of the Size and Wealth of Claimants, January 11, 2016. „Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper” 2016, no. 14, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2713876 lub http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2713876.
Google Scholar
Van Harten G., Porterf ield M .C., Gallagher K .P.: Investment Provisions in Trade and Investment Treaties: The Need for Reform, A Global Economic Governance Initiative Policy Brief, https://www.bu.edu/pardeeschool/files/2014/12/Investor-State-Disputes-Policy-Brief.pdf.
Google Scholar
Zarra G.: The Issue of Incoherence in Investment Arbitration: Is There Need for a Systemic Reform? „Chinese Journal of International Law” 2018, 17.
Google Scholar
Dokumenty UNCITRAL
Google Scholar
Possible reform of inwestor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) Note by the Secretariat A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.142, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.142.
Google Scholar
Possible reform of Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) Note by the Secretariat A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.149, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.149.
Google Scholar
Possible reform of Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) Note by the Secretariat A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.166, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.166.
Google Scholar
Possible reform of Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) Note by the Secretariat A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.194, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.194.
Google Scholar
Report of Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its thirty-sixth session (Vienna, 29 October—2 November 2018) A/CN.9/964, https://undocs.org/A/CN.9/964.
Google Scholar
Report of Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its thirty-seventh session (New York, 1—5 April 2019) A/CN.9/970, https://undocs.org/A/CN.9/970.
Google Scholar
Report of Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its thirty-eighth session (Vienna, 14—18 October 2019) A/CN. 9/1004, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/1004.
Google Scholar
Report of Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its resumed thirty-eight session (Vienna, 20—24 January 2020) A/CN.9/1004/Add.1, https://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/1004/Add.1.
Google Scholar
https://doi.org/10.31261/PPPM.2020.27.09
English
Język Polski