Abstract: ISDS in its current international arbitration format has attracted criticism. In response, the EU proposal for ISDS in the TTIP consists of a two-tiered court system, comprising an appeal mechanism empowered to review first-instance decisions on both factual and legal grounds and, the EU says, paving the way for a “multilateral investment court”. As it stands the EU proposal walks away from the international arbitration format, and consequently the application of the New York Convention. This article (i) expresses surprise at the EU proposal of a court mechanism given the CJEU’s unambiguous, historical unease with other similar, parallel international court systems; (ii) examines whether and how the EU proposal might provide solutions to critical issues presented in two recent cases taken as illustrations and (iii) proposes a third way that would take over the development of TTIP jurisprudence in a more linear and consistent manner, with a longer-term view, whilst ad hoc arbitration tribunals in their current form would focus on the settlement of the discrete factual dispute.