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.
Global Justice Stirling is holding a rally against corporate courts in front of Buchanan Galleries in Glasgow.
Canadian mining companies continue to sue developing countries for environmental policies that affect their profitability and often win huge payouts from these poorer countries, a new report states.
US-based oil producer Talos Energy has temporarily suspended pursuit of an arbitration claim against Mexico amid high-level talks over one of the country’s flagship offshore projects.
More European Union countries have shown signs of impatience with the ongoing reform of the Energy Charter Treaty, which critics say impedes efforts to phase out fossil fuels, according to leaked diplomatic cables.
Russia’s top lender Sberbank initiated investment arbitration proceedings against Ukraine after its parliament approved a presidential decree allowing for the forced seizure of Sberbank-owned assets in the country.
Citing the free-trade agreement between Australia and Thailand, Kingsgate, announced in November 2017 that it had filed a suit against Thailand at an international arbitration tribunal.
Without adequate rules and the right business incentives to protect workers and communities, trade deals can contribute to a ‘race to the bottom’.
We estimate that countries would face up to $340 billion in legal and financial risks for canceling fossil fuel projects that are subject to treaties with ISDS clauses.
Amendments to the mining law in Slovenia which prohibit the use of any hydraulic stimulation in mining exploitation constitute further breaches of the protections established by the BIT and the ECT.
The ZEDEs are free from import and export taxes, but could set up their own internal forms of government, as well as courts, security forces, schools and even social security systems.
A Mexican law that nationalizes its future lithium industry violates its trade obligations under the CPTPP, the International Chamber of Commerce said.
ISDS in Latin America is here to stay. While disputes in sectors such as pensions and telecoms are becoming more common in the region, we expect to see a ripening of COVID-related, tech and energy disputes.
State exclusivity in the lithium value chain can violate the treaty between Mexico, the United States and Canada (T-MEC).
Mexico and many other countries are facing anti-democratic corporate lawsuits like the case that pushed Khan to withdraw from international investment agreements.
Several aspects of Reko Diq deal with Barrick Gold are still concealed and Balochistan is not aware of the details of the agreement, say civil society members and politicians from the region.
For the first time, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned that climate action is being jeopardised by trade agreements which give global corporations the right to sue governments.
In Marmato, the foreign investment promotion and protection system facilitated the transformation of the traditional small-scale mining regime into a transnational large-scale mining regime.
Environmentalists and energy experts have been warning for years over an obscure trade deal that could lock Europe into decades of fossil fuel use.
In 2019, the ICSID tribunal had given an award over $6 billion against Pakistan to the TCC. At the same time, the London Court of Arbitration also imposed another $4 billion fine on Pakistan.