The term amicus curiae (plural: amici curiae) is the Latin translation for “friend of the court.”1 In international investment arbitration, an amicus curiae (sometimes referred to as “non-disputing party”) is any third party that intervenes in certain degree in the proceedings with the view of assisting the arbitral tribunal regarding some of the aspects of a case.2 However, allowing written submissions from an amicus curiae is not equivalent to “making that person a party to the arbitration”.3
Arbitral tribunals have found their power to accept amicus curiae’s participation in different instruments and rules, such as:
The FTC Statement and the ICSID Arbitration Rules (under which the vast majority of the decisions on the participation of amici curiae was rendered) allow amici curiae’s participation only under certain conditions. Article 37(2) of the ICSID Arbitration Rules, Article 41(2) of the ICSID Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules and Point B.6 of the FTC Statement share most of these conditions,22 which are:
Although these rules provide a useful guidance to arbitral tribunals regarding the conditions amici curiae’s participation must fulfil, investment tribunals have followed different approaches towards the issue and considered that the criteria set out in the FTC Statement are not exhaustive.25 In the end, as shown below, the issue remains, essentially, a factual one, whose assessment must be analysed in the circumstances of each case.
To date, 94 petitions to participate as amici curiae were made on 76 different cases (25 in NAFTA cases26 and 69 in non-NAFTA cases27). Of these, 56 petitions were fully accepted (59 per cent),28 four were partially accepted,29 and 34 were rejected by the arbitral tribunals.30 One tribunal has solicited amici curiae participation on its own initiative.31
When tribunals have accepted amici curiae’s participation, they have done it mainly based on the following considerations:
On the other hand, tribunals have rejected petitions on the following bases:
Persons and entities who have requested arbitral tribunals to participate as amici curiae to date included:
The entity with more petitions to intervene as amicus curiae granted to date is the European Commission, with thirty-four petitions granted57 and thirteen rejected.58 Additionally, arbitral tribunals have accepted every petition filed by other international organizations59 and by civil, labour or social associations to date.60 Nevertheless, tribunals have generally been more cautious when allowing the participation as amici curiae of private entities (five petitions rejected61 and four accepted62); individuals (five petitions rejected63 and only one accepted64); non-governmental and non-profit organizations (thirteen petitions accepted65 and six rejected66); indigenous communities (one petition accepted67 and one rejected68); and groups of academics and research centres (three petitions accepted69 and two rejected70).
No. |
Case |
Petitioner(s) |
Decision |
Date |
NAFTA cases |
||||
1 |
United Parcel Service of America Inc. (UPS) v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/02/1 |
(i) The Canadian Union of Postal Workers and (ii) the Council of Canadians |
Granted |
|
2 |
Methanex Corporation v. United States of America |
(i) The Communities for Better Environment (ii) the Bluewater Network of Earth Island Institute and (iii) the Center for International Environmental Law |
Granted |
|
3 |
The International Institute for Sustainable Development |
Granted |
||
4 |
Glamis Gold, Ltd. v. The United States of America |
The Quechan Indian Nation |
Granted |
|
5 |
Sierra Club and Earthworks |
Granted |
||
6 |
(i) Friends of the Earth Canada and (ii) Friends of the Earth United States |
Granted |
||
7 |
National Mining Association |
Granted |
||
8 |
Merrill & Ring Forestry L.P. v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/07/1 |
(i) Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, (ii) the United Steelworkers and (iii) the British Columbia Federation of Labour |
Granted |
|
9 |
Apotex Inc. v. United States of America, ICSID Case No. UNCT/10/2 |
Business Neatness Magnanimity BNM srl |
Rejected |
|
10 |
Apotex Holdings Inc. and Apotex Inc. v. United States of America, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/1 |
Business Neatness Magnanimity BNM srl |
Rejected |
|
11 |
Mr. Barry Appleton |
Rejected |
4 March 2013 | |
12 |
Eli Lilly and Company v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/14/2 |
Canadian Chamber of Commerce |
Granted |
|
13 |
Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association |
Granted |
||
14 |
(i) Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic and (ii) the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy |
Granted |
||
15 |
Intellectual property law professors from universities in the United States |
Granted |
||
16 |
National Association of Manufacturers |
Granted |
||
17 |
A group of academics from the US, UK, Switzerland, South Africa and Nepal |
Partially granted |
||
18 |
Three professors from the University of Cambridge |
Rejected |
||
19 |
(i) Innovative Medicines Canada and (ii) BIOTECanada |
Rejected |
||
20 |
(i) Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, (ii) Mexican Association of the Research Based Pharmaceutical Industry and (iii) Biotechnology Innovation Organization |
Rejected |
||
21 |
Lion Mexico Consolidated L.P. v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/15/2 |
Mr. Iván Mercado |
Rejected |
|
22 |
Resolute Forest Products Inc. v. Canada, PCA Case No. 2016-13 |
(i) Mr. Barry Appleton and (ii) Prof. Robert Howse |
Rejected |
|
23 |
Lone Pine Resources Inc. v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/15/2 |
Mr. Muhammad Muzahidul Islam |
Rejected |
|
24 |
Centre québécois du droit de l'environnement |
Granted |
||
25 |
Alicia Grace and others v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. UNCT/18/4 |
(i) Alterna Capital Partners LLC, (ii) Asia Research & Capital Management Ltd., (iii) Contrarian Capital Management LLC, (iv) CQS LLP, (v) GHL Investments Ltd. and (vi) Ship Finance International Limited |
Rejected |
|
Non-NAFTA cases |
||||
26 |
Aguas del Tunari S.A. v. Republic of Bolivia, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/3 |
Earthjustice |
Rejected |
|
27 |
Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A. and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/17 |
(i) Fundación para el Desarrollo Sustentable, (ii) Prof. Ricardo (iii) Ignacio Beltramino, (iv) Ms. Ana María Herren, and (v) Mr. Omar Darío Heffes |
Rejected |
|
28 |
Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22 |
(i) Lawyers’ Environmental Action Team, (ii) Legal and Human Rights Centre, (iii) Tanzania Gender Networking Programme, (iv) Center for International Environmental Law and (v) International Institute for Sustainable Development |
Granted |
|
29 |
Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, S.A. and Vivendi Universal S.A. (formerly Aguas Argentinas, S.A., Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, S.A. and Vivendi Universal, S.A.) v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19 |
(i) Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia, (ii) Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, (iii) Center for International Environmental Law, (iv) Consumidores Libres Cooperativa Ltda. de Provisión de Servicios de Acción Comunitaria, and (v) Unión de Usuarios y Consumidores |
Granted |
12 February 2007 |
30 |
AES Summit Generation Limited and AES-Tisza Erömü Kft. v. Republic of Hungary (II), ICSID Case No. ARB/07/22 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
31 |
Electrabel S.A. v. The Republic of Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/19 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
32 |
Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula and others v. Romania (I), ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
33 |
Piero Foresti, Laura de Carli and others v. Republic of South Africa, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/07/01
|
(i) Centre for Applied Legal Studies, (ii) Center for International Environment Law, (iii) International Centre for the Legal Protection of Human Rights, and (iv) Legal Resources Centre |
Granted |
|
34 |
International Commission of Jurists |
Granted |
||
35 |
Achmea B.V. (formerly Eureko B.V.) v. Slovak Republic (I), PCA Case No. 2008-13 |
European Commission |
Invitation of the tribunal
|
|
36 |
The Netherlands |
|||
37 |
Pac Rim Cayman LLC v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/12 |
(i) Comité Ambiental de Cabañas, (ii) Asociación Amigos de San Isidro Cabañas, (iii) Asociación de Comunidades para el Desarrollo de Chalatenango, (iv) Asociación de Desarrollo Económico y Social, (v) Asociación para El Desarrollo de El Salvador, (vi) Fundación de Estudios para la Aplicación del Derecho, (vii) Unidad Ecológica Salvadoreña and (viii) Movimiento Unificado Francisco Sánchez |
Granted |
|
38 |
Chevron Corporation and Texaco Petroleum Corporation v. The Republic of Ecuador (II), PCA Case No. 2009-23 |
(i) Fundación Pachamama and (ii) International Institute for Sustainable Development |
Rejected |
|
39 |
Border Timbers Limited, Timber Products International (Private) Limited and Hangani Development Co. (Private) Limited v. Republic of Zimbabwe, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/25 |
(i) European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights and (ii) four indigenous communities |
Rejected |
|
Bernhard von Pezold and others v. Republic of Zimbabwe, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/15 |
||||
40 |
Charanne B.V. and Construction Investments S.A.R.L. v. Spain, SCC Case No. 062/2012 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
41 |
Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands B.V. v. Kingdom of Spain, SCC Case No. V2013/153 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
42 |
Philip Morris Brand Sàrl (Switzerland), Philip Morris Products S.A. (Switzerland) and Abal Hermanos S.A. (Uruguay) v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7 |
(i) World Health Organization and (ii) World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Secretariat |
Granted |
|
43 |
Pan American Health Organization |
Granted |
||
44 |
Antaris Solar GmbH and Dr. Michael Göde v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-01 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
45 |
Masdar Solar & Wind Cooperatief U.A. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/1 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
46 |
I.C.W. Europe Investments Limited v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-22 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
47 |
Photovoltaik Knopf Betriebs-GmbH v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-21 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
9 April 2015 |
48 |
Voltaic Network GmbH v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-20 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
9 April 2015 |
49 |
WA Investments-Europa Nova Limited v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-19 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
9 April 2015 |
50 |
Jürgen Wirtgen, Stefan Wirtgen, Gisela Wirtgen and JSW Solar (zwei) GmbH & Co. KG v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-03 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
51 |
Blusun S.A., Jean-Pierre Lecorcier and Michael Stein v. Italian Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/3 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
52 |
NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V. and NextEra Energy Spain Holdings B.V. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/11 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
53 |
Eiser Infrastructure Limited and Energía Solar Luxembourg S.à r.l. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/36 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
54 |
Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/5 |
Asociación Preservacionista de Flora y Fauna Silvestre |
Granted |
|
55 |
RWE Innogy GmbH and RWE Innogy Aersa S.A.U. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/34 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
56 |
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21 |
(i) Association of Human Rights and Environment of Puno and (ii) Mr. Carlos López-Hurtado |
Granted |
|
57 |
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment |
Rejected |
21 July 2016 | |
58 |
Belenergia S.A. v. Italian Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/40 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
59 |
Greentech Energy Systems A/S, NovEnergia II Energy & Environment (SCA) SICAR, and NovEnergia II Italian Portfolio SA v. Italian Republic, SCC Case No. V 2015/095 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
60 |
Eskosol S.p.A. in liquidazione v. Italian Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/50 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
61 |
Cavalum SGPS, S.A. v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/34 |
European Commission |
Granted |
21 February 2017 |
62 |
SunReserve Luxco Holdings SRL v. Italian Republic, SCC Case No. 132/2016 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
63 |
Novenergia II - Energy & Environment (SCA) (Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), SICAR v. Kingdom of Spain, SCC Case No. 2015/063 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
64 |
Foresight Luxembourg Solar 1 S.À.R.L., et al. v. Kingdom of Spain, SCC Case No. 2015/150 |
European Commission |
Granted |
27 March 2017 |
65 |
BayWa r.e. Renewable Energy GmbH and BayWa r.e. Asset Holding GmbH v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/16 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
66 |
Stadtwerke München GmbH and others v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/1 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
67 |
OperaFund Eco-Invest SICAV PLC and Schwab Holding AG v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/36 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
68 |
ESPF Beteiligungs GmbH, ESPF Nr. 2 Austria Beteiligungs GmbH, and InfraClass Energie 5 GmbH & Co. KG v. Italian Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/5 |
European Commission |
Granted | 22 August 2017 |
69 |
UP and C.D Holding Internationale v. Republic of Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/35 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
70 |
Magyar Farming Company Ltd, Kintyre Kft and Inicia Zrt v. Republic of Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/27 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
71 |
United Utilities (Tallinn) B.V. and Aktsiaselts Tallinna Vesi v. Republic of Estonia, ICSID Case No ARB/14/24 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
72 |
AS PNB Banka and others v. Republic of Latvia, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/47 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
73 |
Strabag SE, Raiffeisen Centrobank AG, Syrena Immobilien Holding AG v. The Republic of Poland, ICSID Case No. ADHOC/15/1 |
European Commission |
Granted | |
74 |
Hydro Energy 1 S.à r.l. and Hydroxana Sweden AB v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/42 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
75 |
9REN Holding S.a.r.l v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/15
|
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
76 |
European Commission | Granted | 19 November 2021 | |
77 |
Spółdzielnia Pracy Muszynianka v. Slovak Republic, PCA Case No. 2017-08 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
78 |
STEAG GmbH v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/4 |
European Commission |
Granted |
5 December 2018 |
79 |
Sevilla Beheer B.V. and others v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/27 |
European Commission |
Partially granted |
13 December 2018 |
80 |
Rockhopper Exploration Plc, Rockhopper Italia S.p.A. and Rockhopper Mediterranean Ltd v. Italian Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/14 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
81 |
Raiffeisen Bank International AG and Raiffeisenbank Austria d.d. v. Republic of Croatia, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/34 |
European Commission |
Granted | 31 December 2018 |
82 |
GPF GP S.à.r.l v. Poland, SCC Case No. 2014/168 | European Commission | Granted | 8 January 2019 |
83 |
Theodoros Adamakopoulos, Ilektra Adamantidou, Vasileios Adamopoulos and others v. Republic of Cyprus, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/49 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
84 |
Addiko Bank AG and Addiko Bank d.d. v. Republic of Croatia, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/37 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
85 |
Eco Oro Minerals Corp. v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/41 |
(i) Comité para la Defensa del Agua y el Páramo de Santurbán, (ii) Center for International Environmental Law, (iii) Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente, (iv) MiningWatch Canada, (v) Institute for Policy Studies - Global Economy Project, and (vi) Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations |
Rejected |
|
86 |
A.M.F. Aircraftleasing Meier & Fischer GmbH & Co. KG v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2017-15 |
European Commission |
Granted |
|
87 |
Daniel W. Kappes and Kappes, Cassidy & Associates v. Republic of Guatemala, ICSID Case No. ARB/18/43 |
La Puya |
Rejected |
|
88 |
UP and C.D Holding Internationale (formerly Le Cheque Dejeuner) v. Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/35 |
European Commission | Granted | 27 December 2019 |
89 |
Cube Infrastructure Fund SICAV and others v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/20 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
90 |
Sodexo Pass International SAS v. Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/20 |
European Commission |
Rejected |
|
91 |
Gran Colombia Gold Corp. v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/18/23 |
Asociación Mutual de Mineros “El Cogote” |
Partially granted |
31 August 2021 |
92 |
GCM Mining Corp. v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/18/23 |
Asociación Mutual de Mineros “El Cogote” | Partially granted | 31 August 2021 |
93 |
Angel Samuel Seda and others v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/19/6 |
Mr. Victor Mosquera Marín | Rejected | 1 December 2021 |
94 |
Odyssey Marine Exploration v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. UNCT/20/1 |
Center for International Environmental Law & Sociedad Cooperativa de Producción Pesquera Puerto Chale S.C.L. | Rejected | 20 December 2021 |