Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Les tiers financeurs comme nouveaux acteurs du champ social arbitral: Reflexions à propos des implications ethiques

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes the emergence of a new category of actors in the social arbitration field, namely third-party financiers, with a focus on the possible ethical implications for investment arbitration proceedings. Third-party financiers are actors-service providers specialized in the financing of procedures in which they are associated with the result and the redemption of arbitral awards which they ensure the execution. The emerging phenomenon of third-party financing in the social field of international arbitration raises various ethical concerns, which have not been regulated by the legal framework of most arbitral institutions. By exploring the various interactions between third-party funders and other actors in the social field of international arbitration, the article intends to highlight the ethical implications that the phenomenon of third-party funding may have on both the lawyer-client relationship and the independence and impartiality of arbitrators. It is argued that the introduction of the new phenomenon of third-party funding into the dispute may disrupt the arbitral process. Third-party funding is particularly likely to lead to situations of conflict of interest for arbitrators, which may affect the final award and exacerbate the crisis of legitimacy of the arbitral process. This article explores the various ethical concerns that it raises, and proposes some thoughts on the need for precise regulation of this emerging phenomenon in the contemporary arbitration panorama. It argues that, for ethics to prevail, disclosure of the identity of the third-party funder and the funding agreement should be encouraged in certain circumstances. This is the way to preserve the integrity of the proceedings and the impartiality and independence of the arbitrators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Notre traduction.

  2. Par rapport à l’arbitrage commercial privé où la confidentialité est la norme.

  3. Il faut préciser qu’il ne s’agit pas là de la seule circonstance dans laquelle un défendeur à une procédure arbitrale peut bénéficier du financement par les tiers [8].

  4. Il a ainsi énuméré une liste de critères à prendre en considération comme: la valeur de la demande; la juridiction où la demande doit être entendue, et où la sentence sera reconnue et exécutée; la probabilité de parvenir à un règlement ou de gagner l’arbitrage; la qualité de l’équipe juridique du plaideur; la nature et la durée prévue de la procédure d’arbitrage; la pratique et la réputation de l’institution arbitrale; le droit matériel du litige; la qualité et la quantité des preuves documentaires, ainsi que des témoignages; la situation financière de la contrepartie et sa capacité de paiement; et le fondement juridique de la demande et les risques associés à toute demande reconventionnelle éventuelle 6.

  5. C’est-à-dire supérieure à deux ans et demi.

  6. « Les financeurs recherchent généralement un rendement d’au moins trois pour un sur le capital investi, ou de 20% à 40% du recouvrement, selon le montant le plus élevé» [19, p. 22].

  7. Par exemple, dans l’arbitrage international, on n’accorde pas à la confidentialité l’importance qu’on lui accorde dans les juridictions de common law [25, p. 37].

  8. Notre traduction.

  9. Notre traduction.

  10. Notre traduction.

  11. Notre traduction.

  12. Notre traduction.

  13. Notre traduction.

  14. Notre traduction.

  15. Notre traduction.

  16. Notre traduction.

  17. Notre traduction.

  18. Notre traduction.

  19. Notre traduction.

  20. Notre traduction.

  21. Notre traduction.

  22. Notre traduction.

  23. Notre traduction.

  24. Notre traduction.

  25. Notre traduction.

  26. Notre traduction.

References

  1. Gaillard, Emmanuel. 2015. Sociologie de l’arbitrage international. JDI 4: 1090–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dezalay, Yves, and Bryant G. Garth. 1996. Dealing in virtue: International commercial arbitration and the construction of a transnational legal order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scherer, Maxi. 2013. Third-party funding in international arbitration: Towards mandatory disclosure of funding agreements? In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bernardo M. Cremades San-Pastor and Antonias Dimolitsa, 95–100. Paris: ICC Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 2018. ICCA—international council for international arbitration-queen mary task force on third party funding in international commercial arbitration report, ICCA Report No. 4.

  5. International Bar Association Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration. 2014. Explanation to general standard 6, b.

  6. Niccolo, Landi. 2012. Third party funding in international commercial arbitration—an overview. In Austrian yearbook on international arbitration, ed. Peter Klausegger, et al., 85–96. Vienna: Beck C. H.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Solas, Gian Marco. 2019. Third party funding: Law, economics and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Frignati, Valentina. 2016. Ethical implications of third-party funding in international arbitration. Arbitration International 32: 505–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Behn, Daniel, Fauchald Ole Kristian, and Langford Malcom. 2022. The legitimacy of investment arbitration: Empirical perspectives, 2022. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Pinsolle, Phillipe. 2011. Le financement de l’arbitrage par les tiers. Revue de l’Arbitrage 2: 385–414.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nieuwveld, Lisa Bench, and Victoria Shannon. 2012. Third-party funding in international arbitration. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Trusz, Jennifer A. 2013. Full disclosure? Conflicts of interest arising from third-party funding in international commercial arbitration. The Georgetown Law Journal 101: 1649–1675.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shaw, Gary. 2016. Third-party funding in investment arbitration: How non-disclosure can cause harm for the sake of profit. Arbitration International 33: 109–120.

    Google Scholar 

  14. De Brabandere, E., and J. Lepeltak. 2012. Third party funding in international investment arbitration. ICSID Review 27: 379–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. MacKinnon, James. 2014. Using legal finance for M&A arbitrations. In Arbitration of M&A transactions: A practical global guide, ed. Edward Poulton, 447–459. London: Globe Law and Business.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gayner, Olivier and Alistair Croft, Anna Stier, and Kate Hurford. 2020. Third-party funding for international arbitration claims: overview. Practical Law UK. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/0-521-2902.

  17. CCI. 2014. Guide pratique sur le financement de l’arbitrage par les tiers. http://icc-france.fr/docmail/Guide_pratique_financement_arbitrage_tiers.pdf.

  18. Smith, Mick, and Antonio Wesolowski. 2017. Mechanics of third-party funding: A funder’s perspective’. In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bench Nieuwveld Lisa and Victoria Shannon Sahani, 35–36. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Selvyn, Seidel. 2013. Third-party investing in international arbitration claims—to invest or not to invest? A daunting question. In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bernardo M. Cremades San-Pastor and Antonias Dimolitsa, 16–31. Paris: ICC Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tweeddale, Andrew, and Keren Tweeddale. 2007. Arbitration of commercial disputes: international and english lawand practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lamm, Carolyn B., and Eckhard R. Hellbeck. 2013. Third-party funding in investor-state arbitration—introduction and overview. In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bernardo M. Cremades San-Pastor and Antonias Dimolitsa, 101–121. Paris: ICC Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Von Goeler, Jonas. 2016. Third-party funding in international arbitration and its impact on procedure. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lévy, Laurent, and Régis. Bonnan. 2013. Third-party funding – disclosure, joinder and impact on arbitral proceedings. In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bernardo M. Cremades San-Pastor and Antonias Dimolitsa, 78–94. Paris: ICC Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kaplan, Charles. 2013. Third-party funding in international arbitration—issues for counsel. In Third-party funding in international arbitration, ed. Bernardo M. Cremades San-Pastor and Antonias Dimolitsa, 70–77. Paris: ICC Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Román Jr, BM Cremades. 2011. Third party litigation funding: Investing in arbitration. Transnational Dispute Management 8: 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Blackaby, Nigel. 2015. Redfern and hunter on international arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Osmanoglu, Burcu. 2015. Third-party funding in international commercial arbitration and arbitrator conflict of interest. Journal of International Arbitration 32: 325–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Langford, M., et al. 2017. The ethics and empirics of double hatting. ESIL Reflection 6: 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mackenzie, R., and P. Sands. 2003. International courts and tribunals and the independence of the international judge. Harvard International Law Journal 44: 271–286.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ad Hoc meeting of the energy charter conference (Brussels, 24 June 2022), finalisation of the negotiations on the modernisation of the energy charter treaty (ECT), section 3. https://www.energychartertreaty.org/modernisation-of-the-treaty/.

  31. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). 2022. Working group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform), Forty-third session (Vienna, 5–16 September 2022), ‘Possible reform of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), Draft provisions on procedural reform’, Note by the Secretariat. (A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.219), draft provision E-1.

  32. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). 2019. Fifty-third session. In Report of working group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its thirty-eighth session. Vienna, 14–18 October 2019, 23 October 2019 (A/CN.9/1004). http://undocs.org/en/A/CN.9/1004.

  33. Favro, Alberto. 2022. New ICSID arbitration rules: A Further step in the regulation of thid-party funding. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2022/06/03/new-icsid-arbitration-rules-a-further-step-in-the-regulation-of-third-party-funding/.

  34. UNCITRAL. 2021. Possible reform of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS). Draft provisions on third-party funding.

  35. Teinver S.A. c. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/1, Award—Dissenting Opinion of Kamal Hossain, 21 July 2017.

  36. South American Silver Limited c. Bolivie. PCA Case No. 2013–2015.

  37. Howie, Rachel, and Moysa Geoff. 2019. Financing disputes: Third-party funding in litigation and arbitration. The Alberta Law Review 57: 465–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Guaracachi America, Inc. and Rurelec PLC c. The Plurinational State of Bolivia, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. 2011–17. Procedural Order No. 13. 21 February 2013.

  39. Muhammet Çap & Sehil In_aat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti. c. Turkmenistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/6.

  40. Muhammet Çap & Sehil In_aat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti. c. Turkmenistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/6, Procedural Order n 3. 12 June 2015.

  41. Muhammet Çap & Sehil In_aat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti. c. Turkmenistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/6, Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction. 13 February 2015.

  42. Voir Aussi Van Boon, Wilhelm H. 2011. Third party financing in investment arbitration. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2027114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre de Recherche et de Documentation Européennes et Internationales (CRDEI), Docteur en Droit à l’Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France

    Milcar Jeff Dorce

Authors
  1. Milcar Jeff Dorce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Milcar Jeff Dorce.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dorce, M.J. Les tiers financeurs comme nouveaux acteurs du champ social arbitral: Reflexions à propos des implications ethiques. Int J Semiot Law 37, 943–968 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10004-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10004-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation