ICSID arbitral tribunal · International (ICSID) · 2014 · Decided; security ordered
Citation/Docket: ICSID Case No. ARB/12/10, Decision on Saint Lucia's Request for Security for Costs (13 Aug. 2014)
Posture: Respondent state vs. funded claimant, seeking security for the state's costs
Funder(s) involved: (funder identity confidential; the tribunal proceeded on the claimant's admission of third-party funding)
RSM had a history of not satisfying costs awards and admitted its claim was third-party funded. Saint Lucia argued that combination made it doubtful any costs award in the state's favour would ever be paid.
The tribunal ordered security for costs, treating the admitted funding together with the claimant's payment history as exceptional circumstances. In separate assenting reasons Dr. Gavan Griffith QC went further, arguing that once third-party funding appears the burden shifts to the claimant to explain why security should not be ordered, unless the funder itself offers adequate security.
In investor-state arbitration, being funded can itself trigger a demand that you post cash before you are heard. Settle with your funder in advance who covers a security order.
Matters like this one often turn on expert testimony, on valuation, industry custom and practice, legal ethics, or damages. The Institute partners with world-class expert witness referral companies for this purpose.
Compiled from public sources (court filings, published opinions, and secondary reporting) as part of the Institute's Phase 1 Dispute Library research. This is educational material, not legal advice; case citations should be independently verified before relied upon.