RE: Ombrina Mare16 Nov 2019 11:33
This is an ICSID description too:
Post-Hearing Briefs in ICSID Proceedings
The written process in ICSID cases usually consists of two rounds of submissions. These submissions include the legal arguments and evidence relied on by each party. The rules allow a Tribunal the flexibility to require fewer or additional briefs, depending on the circumstances of each case.
One type of additional briefing that is often considered is the post-hearing brief. The parties may agree on or be invited by the Tribunal to file written post-hearing briefs after a hearing. These could be focused on a specific legal or factual issue raised in the case, address specific questions by the Tribunal, or contain the parties' conclusions from the examination of the witnesses and experts at the hearing. Sometimes post-hearing briefs will be used in lieu of oral closing arguments.
The main purpose of post-hearing briefs is to assist the Tribunal in its deliberations, and to give the parties the opportunity to answer questions and present their evaluation of the evidence at the hearing in an organized form. In particular, post-hearing briefs can be helpful to address narrow, unresolved issues arising during the hearing. The exercise is not an opportunity to introduce new arguments or evidence, and is not intended to recap every point or to reiterate the arguments.
The need for post-hearing briefs is usually discussed during the pre-hearing organizational conference between the Tribunal and the parties or at the close of the hearing. If ordered, Tribunals generally direct the parties concerning the format of the brief, including timing, page limits, font and spacing. The Tribunal will also direct the parties to the issues of most relevance which ought to be focused on in the post-hearing brief. In most cases, the parties are invited to file the briefs simultaneously, and they are sometimes allowed to file reply briefs. Large briefs and multiple rounds of post-hearing briefs are generally discouraged as they can delay rendering of the award. Tribunals will not always allow post-hearing briefs, in particular where the parties have already had ample opportunity to present their case and their respective positions are clear.
Given their potential to delay deliberations and the award, the Tribunal and the parties should carefully consider in every case whether post-hearing briefs are necessary, and if so, the scope and timing of these filings. Increasingly, Tribunals use alternatives to post-hearing briefs such as asking the parties questions before or at the start of the hearing, or as they arise during the proceeding. Other case management techniques could also replace the need for post-hearing briefs and help save time and money. These should be discussed at the beginning of the proceeding during the first session of the Tribunal and the parties.
https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Pages/resources/ICSID%20NewsLetter/2017-Iss
Sign In
Follow the stocks
