SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND ITS MECHANISMS
Keywords:
Investment disputes, FDI, meditation, arbitrationAbstract
Investment disputes usually arise between foreign investors and host countries when investment agreements or international law are violated. There are several reasons for international investment disputes, and these reasons are analyzed in the article. It is analyzed to what extent the occurrence of investment disputes affects the internal economy of the states, investors, global economy, and diplomatic relations. The factors of settlement of investment disputes are analyzed. Also, investment dispute resolution mechanisms and their pros and cons are explored. Concepts such as ISDS, FDI, BIT, TTIP, ICSID and LCIA will be covered during analysis and study. In addition, the Ukraine-Lithuania BIT, the case between Tokyo Tokelés and Lithuania will be considered. After conducting research in this field and analyzing it, proposals are made for the development of the field and elimination of the shortcomings that have arisen in the research
References
https://www.meti.go.jp/english/report/downloadfiles/2013WTO/03_05_reference_1.pdf
https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/iteiia20073_en.pdf
Investor–state dispute settlement and impact on investment rulemaking.unctad.org
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/investment-andhumanrights/connections/resolving-investment-disputes/
Resolving investment disputes.blogs.lse.ac.uk
Fact Sheet on Investor-State Dispute Settlement Cases in 2018 [IIA Issues Note, No. 2, 2019] 3.
Ting-Kwok IU, 'Is Investor-State Mediation An Emerging Practice? A Practitioner's Perspective - Kluwer Mediation Blog' (Kluwer Mediation Blog, 2022) http://mediationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2019/10/16/is-investor-state-mediation-an-emerging-practice-a-practitioners-perspective/ accessed 10 August 2022.
Brower, II, Charles H. ‘Mitsubishi, Investor-State Arbitration, and the Law of State Immunity.’ (2005) 20 (5) AM. U. INT'L L. REV. 907, 921-922.
Agreement on the Termination of the intra-EU BITs has been signed only by 23 Member states of the EU except Austria, Finland, Sweden and Ireland. Thus, there are still intra-EU BITs in force that give the right to the EU investor to bring the dispute before arbitration. For database of BITs, refer to: 'International Investment Agreements Navigator | UNCTAD Investment PolicyHub'(Investmentpolicy.unctad.org,2022)https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/byeconomy accessed 10 August 2022.
Coe (n xi), 86.
Inna Uchkunova, 'ICSID: Curious Facts' (Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 2022) http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2012/10/25/icsid-curious-facts/ accessed 10 August 2022.
Jeffery Commission, The Duration And Costs Of ICSID And UNCITRAL Investment Treaty Arbitrations (2022) 8.
Greenpeace (11 February 2016). "From ISDS to ICS: A Leopard Can't Change Its Spots" (PDF). Greenpeace Position Paper. p. 1. Retrieved 23 February 2016.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/545736/EPRS_BRI%282015%29545736_EN.pdf
New UNCITRAL arbitration rules on transparency: application, context and next steps/ August 2013, IISD, p. 6. Principles of international investment law / Dolzer R, Schreuer C, Oxford University Press
Reform of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: in search of a roadmap/ UNCTAD, Issues note No 2
Commentary: A case for an international investment court/ Van Harten G., Investment Treaty News,
The Virtues of Investor-State Arbitration/ Schill S, EJIL: Talk!, blog of the European Journal of International Law
Chile-USA FTA, and the Dominican Republic-Central America-US FTA (CAFTA).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
