This paper discusses the case for the establishment of an appellate system in international investment law, as put forward notably by the ICSID secretariat. It assess the pros and cons of such an institutional overhaul of the ICSID system, drawing on the experience of other international dispute settlement systems and taking into account factors such as consistency of jurisprudence, quality and accuracy of decisions, finality of awards, costs and speed of proceedings. Having concluded that an institutional overhaul is unlikely and not required, the paper evaluates potential alternatives to an appellate investment system. These include increased consolidation of cases (seen as helpful), broad construction of the existing annulment procedure (unhelpful) and the introduction of a reference procedure modeled on the European Community's experience (the best option).