Recalibrating Sovereign Immunity: Functional Commerciality and the Execution of Investment Arbitration Awards
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The contemporary architecture of international investment law confronts an efficacy crisis during the execution phase of arbitral awards due to sovereign immunity abuses by host states. Adjudicative triumphs frequently become pyrrhic victories given the monumental barriers to attaching sovereign assets in foreign jurisdictions. This study critically analyzes the interpretative asymmetry between the ICSID Convention and the New York Convention regimes, which severely complicates the economic recovery of investors. Employing a normative juridical methodology with a comparative jurisprudence approach, this article dissects recent judicial decisions across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Findings indicate that debtor nations aggressively weaponize separate entity limitations and public policy defenses as asset shielding instruments. This paper proposes a recalibration of restrictive immunity through the functional commerciality test. Systemic resolution demands preventive mechanisms standardizing explicit immunity waivers, alongside subsequent mechanisms harmonizing commercial property definitions to balance sovereign rights against transnational legal compliance imperatives comprehensively.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Aboelazm, Karem Sayed, Fady Tawakol, and Mohammad Rababa. “Arbitrability of Government Contracts Disputes between State Sovereignty and Investors’ Guarantees: A Comparative Study.” Corporate Law & Governance Review 8, no. 2 (March 3, 2026): 8. https://doi.org/10.22495/clgrv8i2p1.
Bandrovsky, V. О. “Investment Arbitration, State Sovereign Immunity, and Countermeasures in the Light of the New York and Washington Conventions.” Alʹmanah Prava, no. 16 (2025) (April 11, 2025): 359. https://doi.org/10.33663/2524-017X-2025-16-359-365.
Bonnitcha, Jonathan, and Alisha Mathew. “Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration.” Berlin, September 2020.
CC/Devas v. India (I): CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd., Devas Employees Mauritius Private Limited, and Telcom Devas Mauritius Limited v. Republic of India, PCA Case No. 2013-09 (2025). https://jusmundi.com/en/document/decision/en-cc-devas-mauritius-ltd-devas-employees-mauritius-private-limited-and-telcom-devas-mauritius-limited-v-republic-of-india-approved-judgment-of-the-high-court-of-england-and-wales-2025-ewhc-964-thursday-17th-april-2025.
CCDM Holdings, LLC & Ors v. The Republic of India (2026). https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases-and-judgments/cases/decided/case-s902025.
ConocoPhillips v. Venezuela: ConocoPhillips Petrozuata B.V., ConocoPhillips Hamaca B.V. and ConocoPhillips Gulf of Paria B.V. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/30 (2024). https://jusmundi.com/fr/document/decision/en-conocophillips-petrozuata-b-v-conocophillips-hamaca-b-v-and-conocophillips-gulf-of-paria-b-v-v-bolivarian-republic-of-venezuela-judgment-of-the-united-states-court-of-appeals-for-the-third-circuit-thursday-5th-december-2024.
Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (opened for signature 18 March 1965, entered into force 14 October 1966) 575 UNTS 159 (ICSID Convention), art 54 (1966).
Fahner, Johannes Hendrik. “Standards of Appellate Review in International Dispute Settlement: Current Use and Conceptual Challenges.” The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 24, no. 1 (June 4, 2025): 103–23. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-bja10136.
Farrington, Francesca, and Nevena Jevremović. “Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Impact of Replacing or Abolishing ISDS on Investment-Affected Parties.” Journal of International Dispute Settlement 16, no. 3 (June 25, 2025). https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idaf023.
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 USC § 1611(b)(1) (FSIA); State Immunity Act 1978, c 33, s 14(4) (SIA) (1976). https://www.congress.gov/94/statute/STATUTE-90/STATUTE-90-Pg2891.pdf.
Garzón, Andrés E. Alvarado. “2024 in Review: Sovereign Immunity in Flux – An Uncertain Fate for Investment Arbitral Awards.” Wolters Kluwer, January 2025. https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/arbitration-blog/2024-in-review-sovereign-immunity-in-flux-an-uncertain-fate-for-investment-arbitral-awards/.
General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd (Respondent) v State of Libya (Appellant) (2019). https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2019-0166.
Hortoğlu Grant, Yağmur. “Arbitral Fraud and the Power of Arbitrators in the Nigeria v P&ID Case: All That Glitters Is Not Gold.” Arbitration International 41, no. 3 (October 10, 2025): 633–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiaf013.
Infrastructure Services Luxembourg S.A.R.L and another (Respondents) v The Kingdom of Spain (Appellant) (2025).
Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle, and Michele Potestà. “Why Investment Arbitration and Not Domestic Courts? The Origins of the Modern Investment Dispute Resolution System, Criticism, and Future Outlook.” In Investor-State Dispute Settlement and National Courts, 7–29, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44164-7_2.
Majeed, Nasir, Amjad Hilal, and Arshad Nawaz Khan. “Doctrinal Research in Law: Meaning, Scope and Methodology.” Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE) 12, no. 4 (December 25, 2023): 559–63. https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00167.
Reece Thomas, Katherine, and Doğan Gültutan. “Enforcement of ICSID Awards and State Immunity: Should Immunity Trump All? Analysis of the English Court of Appeal’s ISL / Border Timbers Conjoined Judgment, Advocating for a Domestic Teleological Interpretation.” Arbitration International 41, no. 3 (October 10, 2025): 607–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiae053.
Siagian, Dewi Susanti. “Sovereign Immunity in Commercial Transaction Under International Law.” Indonesian Journal of International Law 20, no. 2 (March 13, 2023): 284–304. https://doi.org/10.17304/ijil.vol20.2.752.
The Federal Republic of Nigeria -v- Process & Industrial Developments Limited (2023). https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/the-federal-republic-of-nigeria-v-process-industrial-developments-limited/.
Thouvenin, Jean-Marc, and Victor Grandaubert. “The Material Scope of State Immunity from Execution.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law, 245–65. Cambridge University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108283632.013.
Trevisan, Fabio, Aure-Hélène Gaicio-Fievez, and Francesca Mastragostino. “Sovereign Immunity as an Obstacle to Enforcement: The Luxembourg Approach.” Journal of International Arbitration 42, no. Issue 1 (February 1, 2025): 19–38. https://doi.org/10.54648/JOIA2025009.
Webb, Philippa. “Double Waiver of Immunity and Ripple Effects.” ICSID Review, December 8, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siaf022.
———. “Immunities and States’ Alter Egos.” Journal of International Arbitration 42, no. Issue 1 (February 1, 2025): 5–18. https://doi.org/10.54648/JOIA2025008.
Winch, Phoebe D. “State Immunity and the Execution of Investment Arbitration Awards.” In Public Actors in International Investment Law, 57–77, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58916-5_4.