ISDS Case Map
UNCITRAL
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law
This is the fourth ISDS dispute this year in which the South Korean government is embroiled.
What are states’ concerns about investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS)? To help answer that question, we have put together four posts that compile the most relevant quotes from the first two meetings of the UNCITRAL Working Group sessions.
The takeaway from the UNCITRAL's process for its so-called "reform" discussions is that lawyers making millions in ISDS cases are welcomed, while the voices of the millions of people whose lives are harmed by ISDS cases brought by multinational corporations are barely an afterthought.
This is a crucial moment in international investment policymaking. Two factors have converged, calling for a new direction.
The Freedom of Investment Roundtable considered a Secretariat paper on appointing authorities and the selection of arbitrators in ISDS
South Africa’s new arbitration law came into force at the end of 2017. Now lawyers and clients alike will have to see if it lives up to its promises.
Update to Allen & Overy 2012 study shows increases on all metrics but, importantly, tribunals taking more nuanced and rigorous approach to parties’ costs
More than 40 governments met as part of a working group of the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) to discuss reforms to the investor-state dispute settlement system.
The investment treaty system is likely to be marked by the co-existence of investor-state arbitration and an international investment court, leading to pluralism rather than a dichotomous either/or choice or a clear before-and-after moment.
This Working Group was not “business as usual” because it was much more government-led than is typical of UNCITRAL Working Groups and it started out with a vote instead of conforming to UNCITRAL’s typical approach of working by consensus.
