عنوان مقاله [English]
The Principles and analysis set forth in Third Party Funding in International Arbitration (TPF) apply to both international commercial and investment arbitration. Because investment arbitration involves states, It necessarily implicates a range of policy issues more deeply, more regularly, and (in some cases) differently than private commercial disputes. These policy issues arise within a larger political context, and within the larger policy debates about the purpose, function, and legitimacy of the laws governing foreign investment and investment arbitration more gener. Another factor that complicates discussion of policy issues regarding third-party funding in investment arbitration is that key elements of these debates are often premised on factual assumptions. This article does not, seek to resolve the existing policy questions. Instead, the primary aim of this article is to identify broader policy issues that relate to analysis in earlier articles in "TPF". Toward that aim, this article will first explore general policy issues that inform specific debates about third-party funding, followed by discussion of political risk insurance, and how it compares and contrast with third-party funding and inter-relates with some policy issues raised regarding third-party funding. According to the expansion and increasing use of "TPF" in investment arbitrations, there are evidences showing the acceptance "TPF" by ICSID.