David M. Bigge, Author at Kluwer Arbitration Blog

By David M. Bigge

David M. Bigge is an Attorney-Adviser at the U.S. Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser, Office of International Claims and Investment Disputes (L/CID). He is on the team of attorneys representing U.S. interests in investment treaty arbitrations, including under NAFTA Chapter Eleven and CAFTA-DR Chapter Ten. He also represents the United States in proceedings at the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, and has advised the U.S. government on legal issues related to commercial arbitration. Prior to joining the State Department, Mr. Bigge practiced in the international disputes groups at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP and Dechert LLP, with a focus on international arbitration and litigation for and against sovereigns. Mr. Bigge has appeared in proceedings before U.S. state and federal courts, and in arbitrations administered by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the American Arbitration Association (AAA). In private practice, his clients included state-owned entities, emerging markets investors, participants in the global steel industry, a locomotive manufacturer, and a telecommunications company.

Investment Arbitration, ISDS, Judicial Economy, Minimum Standard of Treatment, NAFTA, WTO

Judicial Economy in Investor-State Disputes

David M. Bigge (US Department of State)/May 25, 2017May 18, 2017 /1 Comment

The recent mention of “judicial economy” in the award in Eli Lilly and Company v. Government of Canada provides an opportunity to consider judicial economy in investor-state arbitration more generally. In its award of March 16, 2017, the Eli Lilly tribunal determined that certain judicial interpretations of Canada’s patent law did not violate the substantive…

Annulment, Arbitration Awards, Arbitration Institutions and Rules, arbitrators’ conduct, BIT, Investment agreements, Investment Arbitration

Iura Novit Curia in Investment Treaty Arbitration: May? Must?

David M. Bigge (US Department of State)/December 29, 2011 /Leave a comment

Iura novit curia (usually translated as “the court knows the law”) refers to the power and/or obligation of a court to conduct its own legal analysis outside the parties’ pleadings. While there are very few decisions on iura novit curia in the investment treaty arbitration context, a small number of investment treaty arbitral tribunals and…