The Harper government says it’s successfully concluded an eighth round of free trade negotiations with the European Union, and despite reassurances from provincial, and recently federal, government officials that water is not on the bargaining table, several Sea to Sky residents are extremely concerned.
French media conglomerate Vivendi (VIV.FR) Tuesday said the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, or ICSID, reaffirmed its original ruling and financial award in favour of the company in a long-running dispute with Argentina.
We know through a leaked version of an earlier CETA text and verbally from Canada’s negotiating team in Brussels that the European Commission wants access to Canadian water and sanitation services.
Marking a final setback for Argentina in its protracted dispute with US-based water services firm Azurix Corp, on 1 September 2009 an ad hoc committee denied Argentina’s application to annul an ICSID tribunal’s previous decision awarding Azurix approximately US$165 Million for breach of Argentina’s obligations under the US-Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty.
British water giant Biwater cannot use an investment treaty to make Tanzania pay millions for an abrogated water privatization contract, an international tribunal ruled in July.
A British water company thrown out of Tanzania over a bungled privatisation deal has failed in its bid to win up to £10m in damages.
The prospect of losing control of water under free-trade or other agreements is something Canadians seem to worry about constantly.
Critics of CAFTA say it was no coincidence that the anti-terrorism legislation was enacted six months after the trade agreement. Update on the case against the Suchitoto 13.
Free trade agreement will make water distribution more unequal for country’s poorest communities. The pact sets the obligation to give a “not less favorable” treatment to US companies, ignoring the deep differences in size and economic power of between these ones and the national sectors.
French media and telecoms group Vivendi said on Tuesday it had been awarded $105 million in compensation at the end of a decade-long dispute with Argentinian authorities about a former water concession.
Tanzania was glad to secure the services of a British-led consortium to run the newly privatised water system in its capital Dar es Salaam. But then the price of water started to rise
MNCs can always refer to Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) to which Indonesia is a party and use the "umbrella clause" in the BIT to transform a problem that was originally a contractual dispute into an international investment dispute.
In excluding water from GATS but not from the Australia-US FTA, we have simply swapped one lot of water lords for another.
Former Enron Corp. (ENE) water unit Azurix Corp. has been awarded $165 million against Argentina in the latest ruling on dozens of international arbitration claims brought against the country by foreign companies.
A person familiar with the situation confirmed Tuesday that both parties were informed Monday of the decision by a tribunal at the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, or the ICSID.
CAFTA creates a new legal framework for the sale of water and other public services, although it allows countries to "opt-out" of the public services of their choosing. El Salvador’s President Tony Saca chose no service exemptions, and thus opened the entire water sector to competition by international corporations.
San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp. has dropped a $25 million dispute against the Bolivian government for canceling a water contract, after major street demonstrations forced a Bechtel-owned subsidiary to withdraw from Bolivia’s third-largest city.
Bolivia faces an impending lawsuit for cancelling the water contract with Aguas del Illimani, the private consortium controlled by majority shareholder Suez. Thanks to a bilateral investment treaty signed between France and Bolivia, Suez has the right to sue the Bolivian government for breach of contract.
The Bush Administration is using the military invasion and occupation of Iraq to advance a corporate globalization agenda that is illegal under international law, has not been chosen by the Iraqi people and may ultimately prove to be even more devastating than twelve years of economic sanctions, two U.S.-led wars and one occupation. The Administration’s ultimate goal is to take the agenda to the entire region.