1. خسروسرشکی، هادی، شفافیت در روند رسیدگی داوری سرمایه‌گذاری بین‌المللی، پایان‌نامه برای اخذ درجه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشکده حقوق داشگاه شهید بهشتی، سال تحصیلی 92-91  
2. Aguas del Tunari, S.A. v. Republic of , Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction, October.21, 2005.
3. Bellhouse, Jahn & Lavers, Anthony, The Modern Amicus Curiae: A Role in Arbitration?, 23 Civil Justice Quarterly, 2004.
4. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, Procedural Order No. 5 of 2 Feb 2007.
5. Bjorklund, Andrea K., The Emerging Civilization of Investment Arbitration, 113th Penn State Law. Review, 2009.
6. Buckley, Ross P & Blyschak, paul, Guarding the Open Door: Non-party Participation Before The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Faculty of Law, UNSW Law Research Paper No. 2007-33.
7. Chirichiello, Michaela & Professor F. Gelias, Confidentiality and Public Interest in Mixed International Arbitration, McGill University, Institution of Comparative Law, 2003.
8. Collins, , Paul M.,  Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
9. Collins, Jr, Paul M., Interest Group Participation in the United State Supreme Court, Paper Prepared For Delivery At The Symposium On The Role Of Interveners In Public Interest Litigation, University Of Toronto Law School, November 6, 2009.
10. Fach Gomez, Katia, Rethinking The Role of Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration: How to Draw The Line Favorable for The Public Interest, Fordham International Law Journal, 2012.
11. Gao, Henry S., Amicus curiae In WTO Dispute Settlement: Theory and Practice, Big Country Small World, China Rights Forum, No.1, 2006
12. Graham, Camilla, A "How To" Guide To Amicus Curiae & International Investment Arbitration, Advocates for International Development.
13. Ishikawa, Tomoko, Third Party Participation In Investment Treaty Arbitration,59^th Cambridge Journal, 2010.
14. Kawharu, Amokura, Public Participation & Transparency in Investment Arbitration: Recent Developments and Future Challenges, ANU College Of
15. Myrvang, Anna, An Illustration of How Traditional Arbitration Is Being Changed By Modern International Investment Law: Investor-State Arbitration Under NAFTA Chapter XI and The Energy Chapter Treaty, Konstanz university (Germany), 2003.
16. Levine, Eugenia, Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration: The Implications of an Increase in Third-Party Participation, 29^th Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2011.
17. Methanex v. United State of America, Decision of The Tribunal on Petitions from Third Persons to Intervene As Amici Curiae.
18. Nicholson, Chris & Collins, Jr., Paul M., The Solicitor General’s Amicus Curiae Strategies in The Supreme Court, 36 American Politics Research, 2008.
19. . Simpson, Reagan wm. & Vasaly, Mary, The Amicus Brief: How to Write It and Use it Effectively, Third Edition, 2010.
20. Susan D. Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review, Vol.73, 2005.
21. Statement of the Free Trade Commission On Non-Disputing Party Participation(NAFTA), 2003.
22. The North Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1994
23. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138, Report of the Panel , 23 December 1999, WT/DS138/R.
24. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Decision Of The Tribunal On Petitions For Intervention And Participation As Amici Curiae,
25. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Mexico’s 1128 Submission on the Amicus Petitions, NAFTA Arbitration, 2001.
26. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, Decision Of The Tribunal On Petitions For Intervention And Participation As Amici Curiae.

Cases:

27. Ab How (alias Louie Ah How) v. United States
28. Aguas del Tunari, S.A. v. Republic of , Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction, October.21, 2005.
29. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Limited v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No.ARB/05/22.
30. Methanex v. United State of America (NAFTA Arbitration case)
31. Piero Foresti v. Republic of South Africa, ICSID Case No.ARB(AF)/07/1
32. Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, S.A., & Vivendi Universal, S.A v. Arg. Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19.
33. United Parcel Service of America Inc v. Government of Canada, NAFTA Arbitration, 2001
34. United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58, (WTO case)
35. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138, (WTO case)