A Report on the Flawed Proposals for Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in TTIP and CETA.


Book Description

This discussion paper elaborates on five serious flaws with proposals for investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in proposed Europe-United States and Europe-Canada trade deals known by the acronyms TTIP and CETA. The issues elaborated in the paper are: the unjustified replacement of judges with arbitrators, the lack of institutional safeguards of independence and fairness in ISDS, the privileging of foreign investors over other actors, the risk to European standards of regulation, and the fact that TTIP (and to a lesser extent CETA) would expand the scope of ISDS massively. The paper is written from a European perspective, considering that most European countries and the European Union have not agreed to ISDS in any past treaty with the U.S. or Canada and thus would assume much-expanded risks and constraints associated with ISDS due to TTIP or CETA.




The Investor-State Dispute Settlement System


Book Description

Investor-State disputes are increasing and damage awards are often significant. It is thus no surprise that the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) system has come under scrutiny. Perceptions have arisen that ISDS is inconsistent, lacks transparency, and is simply unfair. This book delves into the ongoing worldwide debate and discussions regarding the ISDS system. Drawing contributors from around the world, the authors provide insights on critical topics and address the key question facing the ISDS system and the international community it serves: Should the present ISDS system be reformed, replaced, or simply remain as is? The contributors represent points of view ranging from academia to practice to governmental entities, addressing such topics as: the possible consequences of wholesale replacement or elimination of the current ISDS system; mediation as an alternative to resolve ISDS disputes; the creation of a multinational investment court or appellate review mechanism; lack of an early dismissal mechanism to eliminate meritless claims; issues regarding arbitrators, including their appointment and ethical obligations; how investors may retain their right to pursue claims for violations of investment protection following termination of an agreement; a State’s right to assert a counterclaim against an investor-claimant; the role of ISDS in promoting and protecting renewable energy production; the liability of State-controlled entities; the effects and implications of third-party funding; the duty to mitigate damages in the light of excessive damages awards; and improvements and issues relating to post-award enforcement, duration, and cost of ISDS. This book considers the ongoing deliberations and reform measures proposed by UNCITRAL’s Working Group III and provides insights into how several geographic regions and economic cooperation areas have sought to address the question of reform of the ISDS system, including the European Union, the Middle East, and the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. With its much-needed and deeply informed balancing of investor and State rights and duties, this book will be welcomed by all who practise in the ISDS field, including arbitrators, State governments and non-governmental organizations, regional economic organizations, and international investors.




The Popular Legitimacy of Investor-State Dispute Settlement


Book Description

This book offers theoretical arguments and original empirical data on the legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement system in the eyes of the general public. The legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system has become a major issue in recent negotiations on new trade and investment agreements, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP). This book considers the remarkable rise of investor-state arbitration, its politicization and the corresponding legitimacy crisis that has induced a political process of ISDS reform. The book applies theoretical arguments about legitimacy perceptions among the mass public and tests these arguments in survey experiments in Germany, France, and the United States to answer the question of whether ISDS reform can be successful. By showing that large parts of the population hold negative perceptions about the current system of private arbitration and believe that an international investment court and domestic courts are more legitimate dispute resolution systems, the book extends the debate on the legitimacy of the ISDS mechanism, which has so far been dominated by conflicting normative claims of supporters and critics. With regard to the academic debate about legitimacy in global governance, the author underlines that the legitimacy perceptions of ordinary citizens must be taken seriously to ensure the sustainability of global governance and international law in the long term. This book will be of interest to academics working in international relations, international political economy, international law, transnational law, authority, politicization, and legitimacy of global governance. It will also be of great use to practitioners in the field of international investment law, including lawyers, and government officials working in international dispute settlement.




Investor-State Dispute Settlement


Book Description

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is a provision in Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and other international investment agreements that allows investors to enter arbitration with states over treaty breaches. ISDS has become controversial in the United States and our negotiating partners; critics, including some governments, have argued that ISDS is unnecessary, while others insist it is illegitimate as public policy. Treaty-based investment protection represents a major advance in the fair treatment of aliens and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Given the alternatives, withdrawing from investment treaties—the logical conclusion of the critics’ position—would likely have negative consequences for economic growth and the rule of law. This report is an empirical review of ISDS, based on the record of disputes under existing investment treaties.




China, the EU and International Investment Law


Book Description

This book provides an original and critical analysis of the most contentious subjects being negotiated in the China–EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI). It focuses on the pathway of reforming investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) from both Chinese and European perspectives in the context of the China–EU CAI and beyond. The book is divided into three parts. Part I examines key and controversial issues of the China–EU CAI negotiations, including market access, sustainable development and human rights, as well as comparing distinct features between the China–EU CAI and the China–US BIT. Part II concentrates on the institutional reform of investor-state arbitration with an extensive analysis of the EU’s approach to replacing the private nature of investment arbitration with the public nature of an investment court. Part III addresses the core substantive and procedural issues concerning ISDS, such as the role of domestic courts in investment dispute settlement, the status of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) as investors, transparency and the protection of victims in investment dispute resolution. This book will be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of international investment and trade law, particularly investment dispute settlement.




Dispute Settlement in Investment Treaties. Private Courts of Arbitration and their Alternatives


Book Description

Seminar paper from the year 2016 in the subject Business economics - Miscellaneous, grade: 1,6, http://www.uni-jena.de/, language: English, abstract: In the era of Globalisation international investment flows are large. Even small and medium sized companies are active in foreign countries and economies are increasingly interdependent. Despite this globalisation process there is no unified legal framework concerning international investments and the disputes which may arise from them. In this perspective global governance is lacking behind globalisation. International investment is one of the key drivers of economic development. Investors demand legal security, also in countries where domestic governance is weak in order to minimise the non-commercial risks. International Investment Agreements (IIA) between two or more countries serve as primary legal basis to govern and protect international investments and to settle disputes between investors and states. The framework of thousands of IIAs and within it the system of Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is fragmented and increasingly subject to harsh critique of providing inconsistent arbitration awards and lacking legitimacy in general. This paper addresses the development of ISDS provisions in investment agreements and how the current system could be reformed. Chapter two provides a historical overview of investment treaty practice, the roots of the current system and the development of private courts of arbitration. Main ISDS institutions and their rules will be introduced. The following section will point out the arguments in favour and opposing ISDS. Critique will be made visible on examples of prominent cases as well as on overall findings from treaty analysis. The final chapter deals with possibilities to reform, amend or even replace today’s ISDS regime. It will address recent megaregional agreements such like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and their possible roles in shaping future rules which will govern international investment flows.




Recent Developments in the Most Controversial Aspects of EU International Investment Agreements


Book Description

The most controversial issues regarding EU international investment agreements are, on the one hand, the actual extent of the EU's exclusive external competence over international investments and, on the other, the opportunity to include investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in these agreements. The former issue is mainly a legal question, and it especially concerns the inclusion of portfolio investments in the EU's exclusive external competence. In this respect, this article seeks to provide some insights on the opinion that the European Commission has recently requested from the Court of Justice on the free trade agreement between the EU and Singapore on the basis of the latest developments in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. By contrast, the second issue is mainly a political question and focuses on the inclusion of ISDS in the investment chapter of the Comprehensive Trade and Economic Agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada. In this respect, while highlighting the main criticisms of the inclusion of ISDS in CETA, it is argued that the right response to European concerns about ISDS provisions in CETA and in TTIP should not be the removal of ISDS from those agreements. Instead, in order to reduce the asymmetric conditions related to the regulatory powers of the parties to CETA, it would be opportune to ask whether it may be appropriate to adopt, in the EU, a system of control on foreign investments like the one existing in Canada and in the United States. In particular, it is demonstrated how the solution can be found in Articles 64(2) and 207(2) TFEU that could be used to adopt a regulation establishing an EU committee on foreign investment in charge of the review of inflow investments coming from non-EU countries in order to protect the EU's general interests -- first, EU security and welfare -- just as the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and the Minister of Industry of Canada already do.




The ICSID Convention


Book Description

This is a practice-oriented guide, including text, commentary, tables and index, for anyone dealing with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).