ISDS Case Map
ISDS reform
Tweaked versions of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism being proposed to avoid the most controversial aspects of regular forms of ISDS
Brussels has taken a decisive step toward establishing its contentious new investment court as a standard framework for appeals worldwide.
Poland is clearly sceptical regarding investment protection granted by BITs containing an ISDS system in a current form.
The Protection of Investment Act 22 of 2015 (the Investment Act) aims to ultimately replace South Africa’s BITs.
In reality, the EU’s plans are not realistic in the current international context, nor will they appease ISDS critics
India, along with Brazil, Argentina and some other nations, has rejected an informal attempt by the European Union and Canada to work towards a global investment agreement that would incorporate a contentious ISDS mechanism.
While India has been reshaping its arbitration laws and investment climate, the jury is still out on whether these measures will actually help create a more secure legal environment for investors.
Due to inherent systemic issues with specialised and supranational courts, a multilateral investment court would create a high risk on expansive interpretations of investors’ rights.
Pakistan favours the resolution of trade disputes through established multilateral settlement systems instead of ad-hoc tribunals, an official said.
The Indonesian government should stick to its policy of removing the investor-state dispute-settlement (ISDS) mechanism from its bilateral investment or trade treaties.
The European Union and Canada will launch a proposal for a new global investment court system for settlements of disputes between states and foreign investors over discriminatory treatment.
