Three Salient Issues of the New Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Griller
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
National Courts ◽  
System P ◽  
Critical Account ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
The Relationship

The author argues that the mega-regionals are incorporating WTO standards on the removal of technical barriers to trade (TBT), but do not go much further. Consequently, domestic policies on consumer or environmental protection are inevitably affected. However, in this regard, the mega-regionals would not result in a substantive change. By contrast, the relationship between the removal of TBT and investment protection standards is qualified as poorly balanced, unclear, and creating fresh problems. This includes the possibility that damages might be awarded even in cases where the party to the agreement has correctly used its ‘right to regulate’. Moreover, a critical account of the investor-state dispute settlement system foreseen is offered. It is presented as unnecessarily complex, and creating unbalanced advantages for investors. The better alternative would be integrating national courts into the system.

Living without the WTO Appellate Body – Procedural Developments in International Trade Dispute Settlement

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-190
Author(s):  
Andrea Hamann
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Trade Dispute ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

Abstract The current column covers selected procedural and institutional developments in international trade dispute settlement in 2020. During the reporting period, World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement has been facing unprecedented challenges due to the collapse of the Appellate Body. While this calls for a systemic reflection in the WTO forum regarding the future not only of appellate review but of the entire dispute settlement system, the current unavailability of the Appellate Body has triggered WTO Members into improvising temporary solutions. At the same time, some of them have equally seemed to turn to free trade agreements (FTAs) or otherwise to pursue solutions outside of the multilateral forum.

Mapping the Scope of Dispute Settlement in Regional Trade Agreements: Implications for the Multilateral Governance of Trade

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-585 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARC D. FROESE
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Regional Trade Agreements ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Accurate Picture ◽  
The World ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

AbstractThis article argues that the inclusion of provisions for the settlement of disputes in regional trade agreements enhances, rather than disrupts, the centrality of the World Trade Organization's dispute settlement system. Using a dataset that organizes exclusion clauses and special provisions for dispute settlement in regional trade agreements, the study develops a thematic typology that is used to examine the ways that disputes may be channelled between regional and multilateral dispute settlement institutions. This comparative empirical dimension offers a more accurate picture of the global contours of regionalization as they relate to the juridical aspects of trade governance, suggesting that the decentralization of dispute settlement inferred by the rapid development of regional bodies has been overstated.

Part VI The Post-Award Phase, 27 Annulment of ICSID Awards: Is it Enough or Is Appeal around the Corner?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannaca-Small Katia
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Local Bias ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Host Government ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID) Convention prevents domestic courts from reviewing any decisions issued by ICSID panels. ICSID awards are therefore immune from challenges brought before national courts which may have a local bias or be subject to the influence of the host government. This chapter discusses (i) the scope and application of annulment of ICSID awards under the ICSID Convention; (ii) the grounds for annulment; (iii) the stay of enforcement as a requirement that often accompanies an application for annulment; and, (iv) the proposals related to the creation for an appeal mechanism for investment disputes as a response to the mounting criticism of the investor-state dispute settlement system and the quest to improve legitimacy and consistency.

The WTO Dispute Settlement System

2019 ◽  
pp. 62-88
Author(s):  
Sivan Shlomo Agon
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Goal Structure ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
System P ◽  
The World ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

The proposed goal-based approach, which ties effectiveness to goals, requires an in-depth inquiry into the question of what aims underlie the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement System (DSS), the spectrum of functions it should play, and the nature of the relations between them. The present chapter maps these multiple aims as prescribed for the DSS by its mandate providers while probing their complementary and contradictory relationships. In so doing, the chapter lays down the substantive building blocks of the WTO DSS’s goal-based effectiveness framework against which the system’s performance is to be evaluated. In analysing the DSS’s goal structure, the chapter begins with the system’s ultimate ends—the overarching purposes the DSS is expected to fulfil in the long-run—which frame the broad mission it is designed to achieve. It then follows with the system’s more specific, intermediate goals, those which serve as means for realizing the former, more general, open-ended objectives.

Trade and Development

2019 ◽  
pp. 284-306
Author(s):  
Makane Moïse Mbengue
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Multilateral Trade ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
System P ◽  
Multilateral Trading System ◽  
Indirect Impact ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

This chapter describes and analyzes the UN’s contribution to the field of trade and development. Despite UN treaty-making being scarce in this area, the Organization has played a decisive role in the building and shaping of the multilateral trading system. In particular, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has allowed for a better integration of developmental concerns within multilateral trade. In addition to these aspects of direct influence by the UN, it has also had some indirect impact on the construction of the jurisprudence in the context of the WTO dispute settlement system.

scholarly journals The WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body as a Voice Mechanism

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 820-861
Author(s):  
Joshua Paine
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Political ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The World ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract This article focuses on the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) – the diplomatic body, consisting of representatives of WTO members, that administers the dispute settlement system. Focusing on the WTO, the article provides one perspective on the relationship between international tribunals and the political bodies that oversee the governance of such tribunals. Specifically, I argue that the DSB operates as an important ‘voice’ mechanism, which enables members to provide regular feedback to WTO adjudicators, and helps sustain the internal legitimacy of WTO adjudication. However, the DSB can also be used in ways that undermine judicial independence. In short, the DSB is a key site where the tension plays out between WTO adjudicators’ independence from members, and control by, and accountability to, members. The episodes examined in detail to develop this argument are the crisis of a generation ago over amicus curiae briefs, and the ongoing crisis over Appellate Body appointments.

scholarly journals Evaluating an International Investment Court for International Investment Disputes Under European Union’s Proposal

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Ahmed Arafa ◽  
Dexiang Guo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Community ◽  
Protection System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

Berserk resentment of the existing framework regulating the international investment protection system and the operating of investment tribunals have direct to a prevalent perception that there is an immediate need for reform. This is especially pronounced having to do with Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), where there is an overall perception that it is not anything but an unfair and unbiased arbitration system available to decide disputes between states and foreign investors. Therefore, ISDS has been obtained a reputation for being non-transparent, one-sided, and contradictory in all decisions made by ISDS tribunals. The European Union (EU) has responded to this need, by proposing an international investment court; in this research, an attempt is making to look at this court, according to the European Union’s proposal. Moreover, the research explores the potential in creating this international investment court since a system can be drastically altered. However, some criticism can be addressed by international investment courts. However, specific steps can be taken to improve the international community’s investor-state dispute settlement system by re-valuating all the objectives and goals to solve international investment disputes.

Balance Between Investment Protection and Sustainable Development in BITs

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 809-826
Author(s):  
Anne-Juliette Bonzon
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The objective of this article is to examine how substantive and procedural rights granted to foreign investors by Swiss bits are gradually being balanced with social and environmental provisions. Switzerland has enjoyed a long bit practice, as it signed its first treaty with Tunisia fifty years ago. Swiss bits rely on the post-establishment model and include usual standards of treatment. From 1981, they also systematically provide for a dispute settlement mechanism for disputes arising between an investor and a host State. Since the Switzerland – El Salvador bit in 1994, sustainable development concerns have been expressly inserted in some Swiss bits, as well as in several recent free trade agreements. Provisions on this theme are however far from being systematic in Switzerland’s bit practice and essentially remain declaratory in nature. The trend towards wider inclusion of sustainable development provisions in bits still faces several practical and political challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document