investor-state disputes | ISDS

Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) refers to a way of handling conflicts under international investment agreements whereby companies from one party are allowed to sue the government of another party. This means they can file a complaint and seek compensation for damages. Many BITs and investment chapters of FTAs allow for this if the investor’s expectation of a profit has been negatively affected by some action that the host government took, such as changing a policy. The dispute is normally handled not in a public court but through a private abritration panel. The usual venues where these proceedings take place are the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (World Bank), the International Chamber of Commerce, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law or the International Court of Justice.

ISDS is a hot topic right now because it is being challenged very strongly by concerned citizens in the context of the EU-US TTIP negotiations, the TransPacific Partnership talks and the CETA deal between Canada and the EU.

Armenpress | 27-Jan-2023
This arbitration case related to the construction of the railway and highway construction projects was initiated in accordance with the investment treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Armenia.
The Hill Times | 25-Jan-2023
Controversial ISDS provisions are trumpeted for protecting Canadian foreign investments, but are panned for allowing companies to sue countries.
Caribbean National Weekly | 25-Jan-2023
The developers of the hotel project in Grenada say while an amiable settlement remains open, the “extensive damage to the project caused by the actions of the former government has severely complicated and handicapped the efforts towards settlement.
Saskia Bricmont | 25-Jan-2023
This report analyzes the proposed interpretive guidance on the Investment Chapter of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union.
Saskia Bricmont | 25-Jan-2023
La déclaration en voulant clarifier les choses crée de nouvelles zones de flou et, en définitive, tout dépend de la conception que les arbitres devant régler un différend précis se font du lien entre la transition et la protection des investissements.
Euractiv | 25-Jan-2023
Since October 2022, seven EU member states have announced plans to withdraw from the European Charter Treaty. Across the board, the message is clear: the insufficient and potentially climate-damaging treaty reform effort is no longer a politically viable option.
El Economista | 24-Jan-2023
La USTR dijo que funcionarios estadounidenses continúan trabajando con sus homólogos mexicanos para abordar las “graves preocupaciones” con las políticas de biotecnología de México.
Telecompaper | 24-Jan-2023
The US-based company Providence Equity Partners claims that certain actions by national public service regulator SPRK indicate a possible violation of the bilateral investment agreement between the US and Latvian governments.
EJIL: Talk! | 23-Jan-2023
The way in which the reasoning of the Rockhopper award expels any environmental considerations has the effect of making climate change interventions considerably more costly
Open Democracy | 23-Jan-2023
The treaty allows fossil fuel companies to sue governments for taking climate change action. It must go.

0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 | ... | 4790