scholarly journals 5. Investment Treaties, Investor-State Dispute Settlement, and Inequality: How International Rules and Institutions Can Exacerbate Domestic Disparities

2019 ◽  
pp. 112-142
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Investment Treaties

15 Investment Treaty Dispute Settlement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salacuse Jeswald W
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Host State ◽  
Rule Based System ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Diplomatic Protection ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Investment Treaties

This chapter focuses on investment treaty dispute settlement, examining the nature of conflicts between investors and states and the various means provided by treaties to resolve them. In general, investor–state disputes governed by treaties occur because a host state has taken a ‘measure’ that allegedly violates that state's treaty commitments on the treatment it has promised to accord to investments protected by that treaty. Before the advent of investment treaties, investors basically had three methods to seek resolution of their disputes with host states: (a) direct negotiation with host state governments; (b) domestic courts in the host country; and (c) diplomatic protection by their home states. In order to establish a stable, rule-based system for international investment, treaties provide means to resolve disputes about the interpretation and application of treaty provisions. Most investment treaties provide four separate dispute settlement methods: (1) consultations and negotiations between contracting states; (2) arbitration between contracting states; (3) consultations and negotiations between covered investors and host governments; and (4) investor–state arbitration.

Malaysia and Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Learning From Experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 890-917 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sufian Jusoh ◽  
Muhammad Faliq Abd Razak ◽  
Mohamad Azim Mazlan
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Learning From Experience ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaties

Abstract Malaysia is an important destination for foreign direct investment and has signed more than 70 investment guarantee agreements. Most allow investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and Malaysia has been subject to three claims, including two fully argued cases: Philippe Gruslin and Malaysian Historical Salvor. Yet Malaysian companies have also utilised ISDS provisions: in MTD Equity Bhd v Chile, Telekom Malaysia v Ghana, and Ekran Berhad v China (the first-ever ISDS claim against China). These cases provide lessons for Malaysia in becoming better prepared to negotiate newer generations of investment treaties, and to defend further potential cases. Malaysia has not reacted negatively to investment treaties despite the cases filed against the country. In fact, in light of its evolving interests Malaysia has become more of a rule-maker in international investment law rather than a rule-taker. Malaysia thereby continues to liberalise its investment regime and provide better transparency – the best defence against claims.

Part I Investment Treaties and the Settlement of Investment Disputes: The Framework, 1 Bilateral Investment Treaties and Investment Provisions in Preferential Trade Agreements: Recent Developments in Investment Rule-making

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Echandi Roberto
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Preferential Trade Agreements ◽  
Preferential Trade ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
New Generation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Rule Making

This chapter argues that investment disputes, particularly those that have arisen in the context of the implementation of NAFTA, have influenced the refinement of the provisions of new generation international investment agreements (IIAs) as well as the inclusion of a series of procedural and substantive innovations. It addresses the main distinction between BITs and investment chapters in preferential trade agreements (PTAs), focusing on the evolution of their respective rationales. It looks at the main features of the new generation of IIAs and explains how such features respond to challenges derived from the interpretation of substantive and procedural provisions included in previous agreements. The discussion is organized under two themes: (i) moving from the original exclusive focus on investment protection towards also promoting liberalization of investment flows; and (ii) the impact of investor-state dispute settlement on investment rule-making.

Legal Protection for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises through Investor-State Dispute Settlement

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Gebert
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The chapter illustrates the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, as well as obstacles from pursuing claims under investment treaties with corresponding solutions. SMEs are increasingly investing in foreign countries, and may be subject to state measures violating international law standards afforded under investment treaties. Investment treaties regularly also provide for ISDS as a means to enforce these standards by allowing foreign investors to commence arbitration proceedings against a state in a neutral forum. The chapter reveals that despite the perception as a dispute settlement mechanism accessible exclusively for large multinational corporations, in fact a substantial part of claimants in ISDS proceedings are SMEs. While it is true that high costs and the long duration of ISDS proceedings may be obstacles for SMEs, the flexibility of arbitration proceedings and the availability of external funding provide for opportunities to control time and costs.

11 “The Premier International Investment Arbitration Facility in the World”

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parra Antonio R
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
The World ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
Investment Treaties

This chapter examines activities of the Centre from the start of 2011 to the end of June 2015. Almost 50 percent more cases were registered at ICSID in that period compared to the previous five years. The chapter provides some statistics on the cases of this period. As in the decade before, it shows, most the cases were brought to ICSID on the basis of the dispute settlement provisions of investment treaties, mostly bilateral investment treaties (BITs) (in over 60 percent of the cases). A large proportion of the cases (more than ten percent) came to ICSID under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Cases submitted to the Centre pursuant to the dispute resolution clauses of investment contracts made up for a smaller share of the total. A handful (5 percent) of the cases were initiated under dispute settlement provisions of an investment law of the host State. The chapter then looks at institutional developments of ICSID during the period and considers new challenges that ICSID might meet in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document