EU Member States Sign Agreement to Terminate Intra-EU BITs While German Investor Brings Claim Against the Netherlands Under the ECT
On May 5, 2020, 23 European Union member states* formally agreed to the termination of intra-EU BITs.
On May 5, 2020, 23 European Union member states* formally agreed to the termination of intra-EU BITs.
The talks between China and the EU for a Comprehensive Agreement on Investment saw an important milestone in December 2019, as the two sides exchanged new market access offers. They had exchanged market access offers once previously, in July 2018.
Magyar Farming Company Ltd, Kintyre Kft, and Inicia Zrt v. Hungary, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/27
Oded Besserglik v. Mozambique, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/14/2
CMC Muratori & Cementisti and others v. Republic of Mozambique, ICSID Case No. ARB/17/23
There are several efforts underway at multiple levels—national, bilateral, regional and multilateral—aimed at reforming the IIA regime. These reform efforts are operating in parallel to developments in other areas of international investment governance, some of which have advanced quickly over the past year, including the structured discussions on investment facilitation at the WTO, as well as efforts in the UN context to craft a binding treaty on business and human rights. This year’s UNCTAD High-Level IIA Conference assessed the progress made to date since launching UNCTAD’s 10 Options for Phase 2 of IIA Reform, looking at trends across multiple areas of international investment governance, as well as across world regions. This ITN Insight summarizes the key takeaways from the 2019 event and considerations for Phase 2 going forward.
Judgment C-252 of the Constitutional Court of Colombia, on the constitutionality of the Colombia–France BIT, has aroused interest for being the response of the constitutional judge to the way in which foreign investment protection clauses are incorporated into domestic law.
Talks for an EU–China BIT have made some progress in the areas of financial services and national treatment, according to a report circulated by the European Commission in July, with another negotiating round planned for the week of September 23.
Italba Corporation v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/9
The Kenyan government has made parliamentary oversight and public participation a constitutionally mandated part of any BIT approval. While that same parliamentary involvement has fallen short of its desired potential, it could still play a valuable role in ensuring that BIT negotiations are open and transparent, and that the public is both aware of and engaged with the treaty-making process and what it means. This piece examines the lessons learned from Kenya’s BIT and ISDS experience to date. The author argues that the Kenyan High Court’s ruling that double taxation treaties do not require oversight and approval from the legislative branch should not set an example for the government as it considers how to revise its investment treaty-making processes.
Australia has signed a new BIT with Uruguay and an investment deal with Hong Kong. The agreements feature some changes or clarifications to past deals’ provisions on ISDS and on government regulations designed to fulfill public policy objectives, such as health.
ÁLVAREZ Y MARÍN CORPORACIÓN S.A., BARTUS VAN NOORDENNE, CORNELIS WILLEM VAN NOORDENNE, ESTUDIOS TRIBUTARIOS AP S.A. AND STICHTING ADMINISTRATIEKANTOOR ANBADI V. REPUBLIC OF PANAMA, ICSID CASE NO. ARB/15/14
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG V. THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA, PCA CASE NO. 2014-10
Australia and Indonesia have now signed their Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (IA-CEPA), bringing to a close a negotiating process that began in November 2010. The two countries signed the agreement on March 4, 2019. The IA-CEPA also includes an investment chapter and four related annexes, which cover an arbitrators’ code of conduct; expropriation and compensation; foreign investment policy; and public debt.
CONOCOPHILLIPS PETROZUATA B.V., CONOCOPHILLIPS HAMACA B.V., CONOCOPHILLIPS GULF OF PARIA B.V. AND CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY V. THE BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA, ICSID CASE NO. ARB/07/30
CSR refers to rules and practices companies follow voluntarily to limit the negative social, environmental and other externalities caused by their activities. There is a trend to incorporate CSR standards in investment treaties. Could CSR clauses be useful in consolidating enforceable investor obligations and serving as a basis for state counterclaims?
UNIÓN FENOSA GAS, S.A. V. ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT, ICSID CASE NO. ARB/14/4
In May 2018, the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs published its new draft model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), in hopes to foster rethinking of existing and future Dutch BITs. Will this revised model achieve this goal, or does it fall short of the promised policy reset?
Third-party litigation funding (TPF) is a rapidly expanding industry composed of speculative investors who invest in a legal claim for control of the case and a contingency in the recovery. In the wake of the global financial crisis and the demand by speculative finance for new investment vehicles, TPF has discovered the regime of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms.
The right to regulate can be defined as states’ sovereign right to regulate in the public interest—their policy space. Because international investment agreements (IIAs) were created to limit certain aspects of countries’ right to regulate, the first wave of IIAs inhibited host countries’ regulatory experimentation that could be harmful to foreign investors’ rights.
DAWOOD RAWAT V. THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS, PCA CASE 2016-20
UAB E ENERĢIJA V. REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, ICSID CASE NO. ARB/12/33
Jürgen Wirtgen, Stefan Wirtgen, Gisela Wirtgen and JSW Solar (zwei) GmbH & Co. KG v. Czech Republic, PCA Case No. 2014-03
Tanzania passed three new laws in July 2017 that significantly change the regulatory landscape governing natural resources. The reforms are aimed at ensuring that foreign investment benefits Tanzanian citizens.From an African perspective, this article argues that it is time to rethink investment treaty regimes to ensure that they do not hinder much-needed reforms.
Over 300 experts gathered in Geneva to take stock of the sustainable development-oriented reform of the investment treaty regime and discuss policy options for modernizing the existing stock of older-generation treaties. Participants recognized that multilateral collaboration would be key to addressing the complex IIA regime.
In their new book, Jonathan Bonnitcha, LaugePoulsen and Michael Waibel develop a coherent structure for policy analysis of investment treaties that should attract interest as governments review their treaty policies. It argues that investment treaties as currently applied often appear poorly tailored to address identifiable economic concerns.
Caratube International Oil Company LLP and Devincci Salah Hourani v. Republic of Kazakhstan, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/13
Beijing Urban Construction Group Co. Ltd. v. Republic of Yemen, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/30
Orascom TMT Investments S.à r.l. v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/35
This book presents an important systematic study of the issue of sustainable development and international investment law, using conceptual, normative and governance perspectives to explore the challenges and possible solutions for making international investment law more compatible with sustainable development.
This book shows how the current reform in investment regulation is part of a broader attempt to transform the international economic order.
Two African developing countries respond to criticisms against the investment regime. The innovative treaty offers protection to foreign investors without compromising on the host state’s capacity to regulate in the public interest.
China has sustained robust inbound and outbound flows of foreign direct investment and expanded its web of investment treaties. This note sheds light on the country’s appearance in investment treaty cases in the past decade, either as home or host state.
Does the prospect of foreign investor claims against countries in investor–state arbitration lead to regulatory chill? The authors asked officials whether ISDS contributed to changes in the internal vetting of government decisions on environmental protection.
Teinver S.A., Transportes de Cercanías S.A. and Autobuses Urbanos del Sur S.A. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/1
Capital Financial Holdings Luxembourg SA v. Republic of Cameroon, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/18
Burlington Resources Inc. v. Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/5
Argentina has come back to the BIT negotiation arena after a 15-year halt, concluding a treaty with Qatar and engaging in ongoing negotiations with Japan. The new treaty includes traditional along with innovative provisions.
Developed by IISD and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), this toolkit is designed to help trade and investment negotiators by showing how specific provisions can better support sustainable development objectives.
Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa formalized Ecuador’s withdrawal on May 16, 2017 from BITs concluded with 16 countries.
Ansung Housing Co., Ltd. v. People’s Republic of China, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/25
Supervisión y Control S.A. v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/4
Victor Pey Casado and Foundation Presidente Allende v. The Republic of Chile, ICSID Case No. ARB/98/2
ICSID tribunal dismisses claims brought against Indonesia based on forged mining licences Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID Case No. ARB/12/40 Inaê Siqueira de Oliveira [*] After rendering separate decisions on jurisdiction¾one for the case brought by British company Churchill Mining PLC under the United […]
Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID Case No. ARB/12/40 After rendering separate decisions on jurisdiction—one for the case brought by British company Churchill Mining PLC under the United Kingdom–Indonesia bilateral investment treaty (BIT), and another for Australian company Planet Mining Pty. Ltd.’s case under […]
Peter A. Allard v. The Government of Barbados, PCA Case No. 2012-06 On June 27, 2016, a tribunal under the auspices of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) dismissed all claims by Canadian businessman Peter A. Allard against Barbados under the Canada–Barbados bilateral investment treaty (BIT) and the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission […]
The Government of India has proposed a Joint Interpretative Statement to its bilateral investment treaty (BIT) partners. The statement clarifies key substantive and procedural provisions, bringing them more in line with India’s new foreign investment policy.
Special and Differential Treatment (S&D), originally forged in the trade regime, has evolved in trade negotiations and gained momentum in investment agreements, to provide greater flexibility for developing countries based on their needs and capabilities.
Trump election affects mega-regional negotiations including TTIP, TPP and RCEP
Brazil and India initial Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT); text yet to be published
CETA signed; Canada and European Union to “work expeditiously” on creating a Multilateral Investment Court
Venezuela to Pay Us$1 Billion For Expropriating Canadian Mining Company’s Investment
ICSID Tribunal dismisses MFN Clause in WTO GATS as a means of importing Senegal’s consent to arbitration from third party BIT
PCA tribunal deemed acts of Polish Agricultural Property Agency not attributable to Poland
Claimant not considered Investor due to interpretation of “Seat” under Cyprus–Montenegro BIT
Ecuador’s Levy on extraordinary oil profits at a 99% rate has breached Murphy’s legitimate expectations, decides PCA tribunal
Ecuador ordered by PCA tribunal to pay $24 million to Canadian Mining Company