This article is based on the EFILA’S ‘Inaugural’ Annual
Lecture 2015. ISDS in its current international arbitration format has
attracted criticism. In response, the EU proposal for ISDS in the TTIP consists
of a two-tiered court system, comprising an appeal mechanism empowered to
review first-instance decisions on both factual and legal grounds and, the EU
says, paving the way for a “multilateral investment court”. The Lecture
expressed surprise at the EU proposal of a court mechanism given the CJEU’S
unambiguous, historical unease with other similar, parallel international court
systems. The Lecture proposed a third way, aimed at addressing these concerns,
whereby a Committee – stroke – Interpretive Body, informed by the intentions of
the TTIP Parties, would take over the development of TTIP jurisprudence in a
more linear and consistent manner, with a longer-term view, whilst ad hoc
arbitration tribunals in their current form would focus on the settlement of the
discrete factual dispute. Since the Lecture was delivered, the ICS was adopted
in both the EU–Vietnam FTA and (in part) the EU–Canada CETA. This contribution
ponders how the ICS might work in practice, sit alongside current ISDS
tribunals, and contribute to development and jurisprudence in the field.