ISDS Case Map
investor-state disputes | ISDS
There is a high risk that New Zealand would still allow the investor to sue New Zealand in this expensive and discredited system of international investment arbitration
It is astounding that the Supreme Court judgment is being criticised due to an unfair award by the ICSID tribunal against Pakistan when that judgment is completely defensible.
The Nord Stream 2 pipeline company has asked the Court of Justice of the EU to annul the amendments to the Gas Directive but Nord Stream 2 reserves itself this option of resorting to legal arbitration as well.
Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea.
Albania, European Union, Georgia, Italy, Slovenia, Spain
The question for Pakistan now is what lesson can be learned from events that led to the ICSID Tribunal making a $5.9 billion award against the Government of Pakistan.
Pakistan has suffered at the hands of an unaccountable and defective dispute resolution mechanism at the hands of the ICSID, and following the examples of India, South Africa and Brazil, should never have become a part of the ICSID.
Campaigners are urging reform of an obscure system that allows coal, oil and gas companies to sue governments if climate policies hit their profits.
Abolishing ISDS won’t solve all of the problems of global economic governance. But it seems a very good place to start.
This is a story of the dodgy deal by a multi national company and then earning massive amount of money through a World Bank institution acting against developing countries.
