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.

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.

"Haley Sweetland Edwards explains the history of global shadow courts and how these courts have spun out of control, threatening the interests of citizens everywhere including the United States. Her fantastic book is exactly what long-form journalism is meant to do, to move beyond current events and provide historical perspective that aims at future reform. SHADOW COURTS should be at the top of the reading list of all those interested in redesigning trade agreements to be in the publicinterest." -- Jeffrey D. Sachs, University Professor, Columbia University and author ofThe End of Poverty International trade deals have become vastly complex documents, seeking to govern everything from labor rights to environmental protections. This evolution has drawn alarm from American voters, but their suspicions are often vague. In this book, investigative journalist Haley Sweetland Edwards offers a detailed look at one little-known but powerful provision in most modern trade agreements that is designed to protect the financial interests of global corporations against the governments of sovereign states. She makes a devastating case that Investor-State Dispute Settlement -- a "shadow court" that allows corporations to sue a nation outside its own court system -- has tilted the balance of power on the global stage. Acorporation can use ISDS to challenge a nation's policies and regulations, if it believes those laws are unfair or diminish its future profits. From the 1960s to 2000, corporations brought fewer than 40 disputes, but in the last fifteen years, they have brought nearly 650 -- 54 against Argentina alone. Edwards conducted extensive research and interviewed dozens of policymakers, activists, and government officials in Argentina, Canada, Bolivia, Ecuador, the European Union, and in the Obama administration. The result is a major story about a significant shift in the global balance of power.

The reform of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is a subject of ongoing debate in international institutions, yet an ASEAN perspective on the subject has been largely absent to date. This book addresses that gap by presenting, analysing and assessing ISDS reform from an ASEAN perspective, taking into account the experience, needs and concerns of ASEAN as a community and of its member states.

The Selection and Removal of Arbitrators in Investor-State Dispute Settlement explores and assesses two essential features in investor state dispute resolution (ISDS): the selection and the removal of arbitrators. Both topics have received increasing scrutiny and criticism, that have in turn generated calls for reforms In its first part, the book explains the selection of arbitrators procedurally and comparatively under the most-often used arbitration rules.

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.

This book examines the role of home states to investment disputes and questions whether it represents a return to diplomatic protection.