The Jurisdictional Maze: Dual Nationality in International Investment Arbitration

p class="MsoNormal"Investors initiating investment arbitration against a host state must satisfy a series of prerequisite conditions, one of which includes being a qualified investor protected under the investment treaty. In cases of dual nationality, determining which nationality is applicable in investment arbitration can be highly complex. This complexity arises because most international investment agreements (IIAs) need to clearly define whether individuals with dual nationality are eligible to qualify as investors. A significant issue is balancing protecting investors’ rights and respecting states’ sovereignty. Principles such as the‘effective nationality’exemplified in the Nottebohm case play a crucial role in addressing dual nationality issues by highlighting the importance of the tangible connection between individuals and their countries of nationality. This article takes the dispute points in the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) case of Hussein Nuaman Soufraki v. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) as an example. It discusses the different cases of different arbitral institutions and recent cases. These results suggest the need for more precise guidelines and more consistent application of principles to address dual nationality issues in the future. Future research should focus on developing unified criteria for nationality determination and exploring the implications of nationality issues in emerging investment scenarios.o:p/o:p