Investment arbitration has been increasingly criticised as being, among other things, slow, cumbersome and unpredictable in light of the contradictory awards arising from similar factual situations. Recent renewable energy proceedings against Spain, Italy and the Czech Republic have prompted the author to revisit the idea of a consolidation facility in investment arbitration in order to address some of these shortcomings. Unlike earlier attempts, which focused on the possibility of consolidating disputes that are conducted under one set of procedural rules, the author, inspired by the recent SIAC Proposal on Cross-Institution Consolidation Protocol, explores the possibility of consolidating disputes that are conducted under different rules in investor-state arbitration. The author analyses the benefits of such Proposal and assesses the need for a similar instrument in the realm of investment arbitration. In doing so, the author discusses existing consolidation mechanisms under NAFTA, certain BITs and new trade agreements (CETA, TTIP and the EU-Singapore Investment Protection Agreement) and addresses the different aspects of a potential new consolidation facility in investment arbitration and the possible hurdles it might face on route to acceptance.