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.

Stop TTIP | 13-Feb-2015
A report authored by Prof. Dr. Siegfried Broß and recently published by the German Hans Böckler Stiftung concludes that the Investor-State-Dispute Settlement (ISDS) tribunals currently planned to be included in the TTIP and CETA free-trade agreements are not in accordance with Germany’s constitution.
JD Supra | 9-Feb-2015
Three recent ICSID decisions involving Ecuador highlight the importance of language addressing the status of taxes in investment treaties.
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment | 6-Feb-2015
Advocates of a transatlantic investment treaty should be careful not to overstate their case and play the “China-card” as a core argument for allowing US investors to side-track EU courts.
EurActiv | 6-Feb-2015
The French Senate united on Tuesday (3 February) in its opposition to the Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS).
FT | 5-Feb-2015
It is very difficult to refute the general allegation that the TTIP agenda is driven by big business interests, writes John Kay
EurActiv | 5-Feb-2015
En France, UMP et extrême-gauche expriment les mêmes réserves sur les procédures d’arbitrage qu’ils appellent à modifier dans une résolution adoptée à l’unanimité.
EurActiv | 27-Jan-2015
Trade negotiations between the EU and Canada concluded in October 2013, but France and Germany now want to make changes to the CETA agreement’s investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clause.
EurActiv | 27-Jan-2015
La France et l’Allemagne veulent modifier la clause de règlement des différends entre investisseurs et Etats de l’accord commercial UE-Canada, dont les négociations sont pourtant terminées depuis octobre 2013.
Mediate.com | 26-Jan-2015
There is a developing consensus among states that it is acceptable, and even virtuous, to challenge investor-state arbitration as an infringement on the rights of the public to pass laws through their democratically-elected representatives.
SSRN | 26-Jan-2015
This article analyzes the restrictive approach adopted by investor-State arbitration tribunals to human rights arguments raised by host States, as exemplified in the case of the human right to water