This open access book examines the multiple intersections between national and international courts in the field of investment protection, and suggests possible modes for regulating future jurisdictional interactions between domestic courts and international tribunals. The current system of foreign investment protection consists of more than 3,000 international investment agreements (IIAs), most of which provide for investment arbitration as the forum for the resolution of disputes between foreign investors and host States. However, national courts also have jurisdiction over certain matters involving cross-border investments. International investment tribunals and national courts thus interact in a number of ways, which range from harmonious co-existence to reinforcing complementation, reciprocal supervision and, occasionally, competition and discord. The book maps this complex relationship between dispute settlement bodies in the current investment treaty context and assesses the potential role of domestic courts in future treaty frameworks that could emerge from the States current efforts to reform the system. The book concludes that, in certain areas of interaction between domestic courts and international investment tribunals, the "division of labor" between the two bodies is not always optimal, producing inefficiencies that burden the system as a whole. In these areas, there is a need for improvement by introducing a more fruitful allocation of tasks between domestic and international courts and tribunals - whatever form(s) the international mechanism for the settlement of investment disputes may take. Given its scope, the book contributes not only to legal analysis, but also to the policy reflections that are needed for ongoing efforts to reform investor-State dispute settlement.

This open access book examines the multiple intersections between national and international courts in the field of investment protection, and suggests possible modes for regulating future jurisdictional interactions between domestic courts and international tribunals. The current system of foreign investment protection consists of more than 3,000 international investment agreements (IIAs), most of which provide for investment arbitration as the forum for the resolution of disputes between foreign investors and host States. However, national courts also have jurisdiction over certain matters involving cross-border investments. International investment tribunals and national courts thus interact in a number of ways, which range from harmonious co-existence to reinforcing complementation, reciprocal supervision and, occasionally, competition and discord. The book maps this complex relationship between dispute settlement bodies in the current investment treaty context and assesses the potential role of domestic courts in future treaty frameworks that could emerge from the States’ current efforts to reform the system.The book concludes that, in certain areas of interaction between domestic courts and international investment tribunals, the “division of labor” between the two bodies is not always optimal, producing inefficiencies that burden the system as a whole. In these areas, there is a need for improvement by introducing a more fruitful allocation of tasks between domestic and international courts and tribunals – whatever form(s) the international mechanism for the settlement of investment disputes may take.Given its scope, the book contributes not only to legal analysis, but also to the policy reflections that are needed for ongoing efforts to reform investor-State dispute settlement.

Investor-State disputes are increasing and damage awards are often significant. It is thus no surprise that the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) system has come under scrutiny. Perceptions have arisen that ISDS is inconsistent, lacks transparency, and is simply unfair. This book delves into the ongoing worldwide debate and discussions regarding the ISDS system. Drawing contributors from around the world, the authors provide insights on critical topics and address the key question facing the ISDS system and the international community it serves: Should the present ISDS system be reformed, replaced, or simply remain as is? The contributors represent points of view ranging from academia to practice to governmental entities, addressing such topics as: the possible consequences of wholesale replacement or elimination of the current ISDS system; mediation as an alternative to resolve ISDS disputes; the creation of a multinational investment court or appellate review mechanism; lack of an early dismissal mechanism to eliminate meritless claims; issues regarding arbitrators, including their appointment and ethical obligations; how investors may retain their right to pursue claims for violations of investment protection following termination of an agreement; a State’s right to assert a counterclaim against an investor-claimant; the role of ISDS in promoting and protecting renewable energy production; the liability of State-controlled entities; the effects and implications of third-party funding; the duty to mitigate damages in the light of excessive damages awards; and improvements and issues relating to post-award enforcement, duration, and cost of ISDS. This book considers the ongoing deliberations and reform measures proposed by UNCITRAL’s Working Group III and provides insights into how several geographic regions and economic cooperation areas have sought to address the question of reform of the ISDS system, including the European Union, the Middle East, and the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. With its much-needed and deeply informed balancing of investor and State rights and duties, this book will be welcomed by all who practise in the ISDS field, including arbitrators, State governments and non-governmental organizations, regional economic organizations, and international investors.

This book offers theoretical arguments and original empirical data on the legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement system in the eyes of the general public. The legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system has become a major issue in recent negotiations on new trade and investment agreements, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP). This book considers the remarkable rise of investor-state arbitration, its politicization and the corresponding legitimacy crisis that has induced a political process of ISDS reform. The book applies theoretical arguments about legitimacy perceptions among the mass public and tests these arguments in survey experiments in Germany, France, and the United States to answer the question of whether ISDS reform can be successful. By showing that large parts of the population hold negative perceptions about the current system of private arbitration and believe that an international investment court and domestic courts are more legitimate dispute resolution systems, the book extends the debate on the legitimacy of the ISDS mechanism, which has so far been dominated by conflicting normative claims of supporters and critics. With regard to the academic debate about legitimacy in global governance, the author underlines that the legitimacy perceptions of ordinary citizens must be taken seriously to ensure the sustainability of global governance and international law in the long term. This book will be of interest to academics working in international relations, international political economy, international law, transnational law, authority, politicization, and legitimacy of global governance. It will also be of great use to practitioners in the field of international investment law, including lawyers, and government officials working in international dispute settlement.

This book addresses the interactions between the domestic courts and the international investment arbitral tribunals, one of the most pressing issues confronting both domestic legal systems and the international legal system. It deals with the core issues inherent in the above interactions, especially with regard to countries outside the ICSID system. It contrasts this narrative with the position under classical international investment law, where national courts are assigned a very specific and minimalistic role in the process of investment disputes settlement. For this purpose, the book chooses India, which follows the non-ICSID model, as the major point of focus and considers both domestic judicial decisions and investment arbitral decisions for critical analysis. The ICSID Convention grants limited powers to domestic courts to issue provisional measures and to enforce ICSID awards. As the central theme of the book lies at the intersection of domestic law and international law, the work is indispensable for any scholar working in the areas of general international law, international investment law, international economic law, law and economics, international dispute settlement, or international law in domestic courts, as well as domestic judges and international arbitrators. Further, as the subject matter has great implications for both domestic and global governance, it will benefit civil servants, opinion leaders, policy planners and subject experts in economics, the political economy and regional studies, to name a few.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is a provision in Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and other international investment agreements that allows investors to enter arbitration with states over treaty breaches. ISDS has become controversial in the United States and our negotiating partners; critics, including some governments, have argued that ISDS is unnecessary, while others insist it is illegitimate as public policy. Treaty-based investment protection represents a major advance in the fair treatment of aliens and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Given the alternatives, withdrawing from investment treaties—the logical conclusion of the critics’ position—would likely have negative consequences for economic growth and the rule of law. This report is an empirical review of ISDS, based on the record of disputes under existing investment treaties.

In Reshaping the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System: Journeys for the 21st Century, editors Jean E. Kalicki and Anna Joubin-Bret offer for the first time a broad compendium of practical suggestions for reform of the current system of resolving international investment treaty disputes. The increase in cases against States and their challenge to public policy measures has generated a strong debate, usually framed by complaints about a perceived lack of legitimacy, consistency and predictability. While some ideas have been proposed for improvement, there has never before been a book systematically focusing on constructive paths forward. This volume features 38 chapters by almost 50 leading contributors, all offering concrete proposals to improve the ISDS system for the 21st century.

Edited by Shaheeza Lalani and Rodrigo Polanco Lazo, The Role of the State in Investor-State Arbitration is a collection of contributions from lawyers, arbitrators and political scientists on the development of the concept of the “State” in a field that currently presents an increasing number of controversial disputes: Investor-State Arbitration. The book analyzes the limits of the host State as a regulator, studying issues such as attribution and the role of State-Owned Enterprises and sub-State entities; the changing role of the home State in Investor-State disputes, including its direct participation in Investor-State arbitration and State to State dispute settlement; and the overall role that both home and host States can play in the improvement of Investor-State Dispute Settlement.

This book provides an original and critical analysis of the most contentious subjects being negotiated in the China–EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI). It focuses on the pathway of reforming investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) from both Chinese and European perspectives in the context of the China–EU CAI and beyond. The book is divided into three parts. Part I examines key and controversial issues of the China–EU CAI negotiations, including market access, sustainable development and human rights, as well as comparing distinct features between the China–EU CAI and the China–US BIT. Part II concentrates on the institutional reform of investor-state arbitration with an extensive analysis of the EU’s approach to replacing the private nature of investment arbitration with the public nature of an investment court. Part III addresses the core substantive and procedural issues concerning ISDS, such as the role of domestic courts in investment dispute settlement, the status of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) as investors, transparency and the protection of victims in investment dispute resolution. This book will be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of international investment and trade law, particularly investment dispute settlement.

Prabhash Ranjan explores the two competing narratives of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and focuses on the six ISDS cases India lost. On the one hand, ISDS is chastised for affronting the State’s sovereign regulatory power – the Philip Morris narrative. On the other hand, ISDS allows investors to hold States accountable for abuse of public power – the Yukos narrative. This book argues that India’s ISDS story resembles the Yukos narrative. With a focus on six case studies, this book examines the reasons that led to foreign investors suing India and the following developments. These ISDS claims are divided into four categories: a case arising from judicial actions, claims brought because of the cancellation of a contract to lease spectrum, conflicts resulting from the imposition of retroactive taxes, and disputes arising from the actions of sub-national governments. Based on India’s recent treaty practice, the book also contends that India is de-legalizing and de-judicializing international investment law. By telling India’s ISDS story, the book drives home the point that rectifying the ISDS system's flaws requires both narratives' centrality. Excessive focus on the Philip Morris narrative will replace the existing imbalances with a new one where the scale tilts towards the States to the detriment of foreign investment. This is a useful reference for scholars and practitioners interested in ISDS and its implications for India.