1. فارسی
2. بادپا، سحر؛ حیدری، سیروس (۱۴۰۰). سوءاستفاده از حق اقامة دعوا در نظام حقوقی ایران و انگلستان. مجلة علمی پژوهشی حقوق پزشکی، ویژه‌نامة نوآوری حقوقی، ۵۵۱-۵۶۶.
3. برزگرزاده، عباس (۱۴۰۱). ایراد سوءاستفاده از دادرسی در دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری با تأکید بر قضیة تحریم‌های ایران توسط ایالات متحدة آمریکا. فصلنامة علمی مطالعات بین‌المللی پلیس، (۵۰)، ۶۴-۹۱.
4. برزگرزاده، عباس (۱۴۰۱). تأثیر سوءاستفاده از دادرسی و حق در رسیدگی‌های مقدماتی و ماهوی ایکسید. نشریة علمی دانش حقوق مدنی، (۱)، ۵۱-۶۴.

2. انگلیسی
3. A) Articles
4. Ascensio, H. (2014), Abuse of Process in International Investment Arbitration. Chinese Journal of International Law, (13), 763-785. https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmu040
5. Brabandere, E. D. (2012). Good Faith, Abuse of Process and The Initiation of Investment Treaty Claims.Journal of International Dispute Settlement, (3), 609-636. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/ids008
6. Branson, J. D. (2021). the Abuse of Process Doctrine Extended: a Tool for Right Thinking People in International Arbitration. Journal of International Arbitration.
7. Fukunaga, Y. (2018). Abuse of Process Under International Law and Investment Arbitration. ICSID Review (33), 181-211 https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/six032
8. Gaillard, E. (2017). Abuse of process in International Arbitration. ICSID Review, (32), 17-37.

https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siw036

9. Kolb, R, (2006). General principles of procedural law. In: the Statute of the International Court of Justice: a Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 871-908,
10. Lemey, M. (2021). Incidental Proceedings Before The International Court of Justice: The Fine Line Between Litigation strategy and Abuse of Process. The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, (20), 5-29. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341437

1. B) Documents
2. ILA Committee on International Commerical Arbitration, “Interim Report: Res Judicata and Arbitration” (Berlin 2004)

1. C) Thesis
2. Polonskaya, K. (2014). Abuse of Rights: Should the Investor-State Tribunals Extend the Application of the Doctrine, for the Degree of Master, University of Toronto.
3. El far, Ahmed Mohsen, (2018). Abuse of Rights in International Arbitration, For The Degree of P.H.D, Queen Mary University of London.

1. D) Cases
2. Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights (Iran v. United States of America) Judgment of 6 February 2021, I.C.J. Para 89
3. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide ( Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia) Judgment of 11 July 1996, I.C.J. p 609.
4. Ampal – American Israel Corporation and Others v. Arab Republic of Egypt, Decision on Jurisdiction 1 February 2016, ICSID Case No.ARB/12/11, Paras 306, 313, 345
5. Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) Preliminary Objections Submitted by United States of America, 1 May 2017, I.C.J, Reports 2017, Para 6.13
6. Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia (Germany v. Poland) Judgment of 25 May 1926, P.C.I.J. P 30
7. Chevron Corporation & Texaco Petroleum Corporation v. The Republic of Ecuador, UNCITRAL/PCA, Case No. 34877, Interim Award of 1 December 2008, Paras 137, 143
8. Henderson v. Henderson, 1843, para 115
9. Immunities and Criminal Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France),Preliminary Objections, Judgment of 6 June 2018, I.C.J. Reports 2018, paras140,146,150, 151
10. Immunities and Criminal Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France) Preliminary Objections, Verbatim Record CR 2018, I.C.J. Reports 2018, Para 26
11. Northern Cameroons (Cameroon v United Kingdom), Preliminary Objections, Judgment of 2 December 1963, I.C.J , Reports 15, para 29
12. Nuclear Tests (Australia v France), Judgment of 20 December 1974, I.C.J, Reports 253, para 23
13. Phoenix Action, Ltd v. Czech Republic, Award of 19 April 2009 ICSID Case No. ARB/06/5, Paras 34-38, 40, 144
14. Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 31 March 2004 in the Case concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), Oral proceedings, Verbatim record CR 2008, para 50
15. Renee Rose Levy and Gremcitel S.A. v. Republic of Peru, Award of 9 January 2015, ICSID Case No.ARB/11/17, Paras 181,186, 191
16. The Rompetrol Group N.V v. Romania, Decision on Respondent Preliminary Objections on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of 18 April 2008, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/3, Paras 111, 115
17. Strabag SE, Raffeisen Centrobank AG and Syrena Immobilien Holding AG v. Republic of Poland, Partial Award on Jurisdiction of 4 March 2020, ICSID Case No.ARB/15/1, Para 6.9
18. Tokio Tokeles v. Ukraine, Decision on Jurisdiction of 29 April 2004, Dissenting Opinion Chairman Prosper Weil, ICSID Case No.ARB/02/18, Para30