bilaterals.org logo
bilaterals.org logo

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.


Thailand must stand firm in trade deal talks
The investment chapter under the proposed TPP and the Thailand-EU FTA, if adopted, might place Thailand’s substantive ability to protect public interests at risk, warns Jakkrit Kuanpoth.
Where are the TPP negotiations up to?
Discussion with Susan Sell, Matthew Rimmer and Jane Kelsey
New bilateral investment treaty model
Pakistan’s Board of Investment is working on Pakistan’s own template of a bilateral investment treaty, which will replace previous treaties and serve as basis for new ones.
France makes U-turn on TTIP arbitration
In a letter to French MEPs, seen by EurActiv France, the French Secretariat General for European Affairs (SGAE) appears to have made a U-turn on the position so far defended by Mathias Fekl, the Secretary of State for Foreign Trade.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership clause everyone should oppose
"Agreeing to ISDS in this enormous new treaty would tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations. Worse, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty," writes Elizabeth Warren.
Update on Indonesia BITs review
Indonesia for Global Justice together with Indonesian civil society networks met with the Director of Bilateral Cooperation of Investment Coordinating Board, Fritz Horas Silalahi, in Jakarta to discuss the review of Indonesia Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITS).
ISDS in EU-Singapore deal too favourable to corporations, should be modified according to lead MEP David Martin
David Martin MEP (S&D, UK), the European Parliament’s rapporteur on the EU-Singapore trade deal, criticises the infamous ISDS (investor-to-state dispute settlement) part of the agreement.
European Left united to reform international arbitration tribunals
Rather than abandoning completely the TTIP/TAFTA negotiations (and their little cousin CETA, an agreement between Canada and the EU) which is what a good part of civil society are calling for, the European Left wants to thoroughly reform this arbitral mechanism to limits its abuses.
UNCTAD releases review of trends in investment agreements and investor-State dispute settlement
​In 2014, countries concluded one international investment agreement every other week. Investors continue to use investor-State dispute settlement, but the number of new cases does not reach the record high of previous years.
ISDS beyond TTIP: EU reforms and impacts on the Global South
Public event organised by Transnational Institute, Friends of the Earth Europe and Traidcraft on 4 March 2015 in Brussels
Corporate coup d’état: Those crappy trade deals
The corporate media would prefer that people know nothing about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), the US-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and other trade deals.
Dar briefed on BIT regime
Pakistan Finance minister says the government will review its existing bilateral investment treaties and develop a template for future ones.
Protect our climate and health, not multinational profits
This week’s edition of world-leading medical journal The Lancet includes a call by 27 health experts from New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, the USA, and Vietnam for the TPPA to be made public so its overall health impacts can be assessed.
Germany: Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is unconstitutional
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.
The ’Law 42’ arbitrations against Ecuador and the importance of BIT language
Three recent ICSID decisions involving Ecuador highlight the importance of language addressing the status of taxes in investment treaties.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, investor-state dispute settlement and China
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.
French Senate tells TTIP negotiators to ‘abolish’ ISDS
The French Senate united on Tuesday (3 February) in its opposition to the Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS).
Petitioners’ fears over EU-US trade deal well-grounded
It is very difficult to refute the general allegation that the TTIP agenda is driven by big business interests, writes John Kay
Paris and Berlin call for review of EU-Canada trade deal
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.
“Investment arbitration is now on Broadway, and the critics are not being kind”
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.