Over the years, the investment treaty arbitration has emerged as the chief means to resolve disputes between foreign investors and the host state. One of the major reasons for this development is that in case of invocation of investment treaty arbitration, the recourse to domestic courts is almost excluded. From the investor’s perspective, domestic courts are not usually considered as an effective forum to settle their disputes with the host state because of the perceived fear of home-court bias. However, in practice, domestic courts are making interventions in the resolutions on numerous occasions. More importantly, the ICSID Additional Facility and the non-ICSID awards are subject to review by domestic courts at the time of enforcement of awards or for purposes of grant of interim reliefs. There are also other instances in which judicial proceedings are pursued in parallel to investment arbitration, especially in cases of …