Minimum Standard of Treatment

Fair and Equitable Treatment, International Investment Arbitration, International Investment Law, International Law, Investment Arbitration, Investment Disputes, Investment law, Investment protection, Minimum Standard of Treatment

, (Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP) and (Hughes Hubbard LLP)/ /Leave a comment

FET is often described as the core standard of international investment law.  Recently, there has been renewed discussion on its intended meaning, by reference to a range of source materials that arguably reflect States’ intentions at the time of concluding investment treaties.  On December 10, 2021, the Dispute Resolution Interest Group of the American Society…

Expropriation, Investment Arbitration, Investor-State arbitration, Minimum Standard of Treatment, Most Favoured Nation (MFN), National Treatment, Non-Disputing NAFTA Parties, Non-Disputing Parties, United States

(US Department of State)/ /Leave a comment

In 2019, the United States (‘U.S.’) made six non-disputing Party submissions in investment treaty arbitrations, three of which took place under the NAFTA (Lion Mexico Consol. L.P. v. Mexico; Vento Motorcycles, Inc. v. Mexico; and Tennant Energy, LLC v. Canada), and one each of which took place under U.S. agreements with Korea, Peru and Panama (Jin Hae…

Investment protection, Minimum Standard of Treatment

/ /Leave a comment

International Minimum Standard of Treatment (IMST) is one of the most important protection standards available to non-domestic investors under international law. The standard has been a subject of controversy on a number of occasions (see, for instance Saluka v. Czech Republic). Much of the controversy and debate arise with respect to the relationship of IMST…

Investment Arbitration, ISDS, Judicial Economy, Minimum Standard of Treatment, NAFTA, WTO

(US Department of State)/ /1 Comment

The recent mention of “judicial economy” in the award in Eli Lilly and Company v. Government of Canada provides an opportunity to consider judicial economy in investor-state arbitration more generally. In its award of March 16, 2017, the Eli Lilly tribunal determined that certain judicial interpretations of Canada’s patent law did not violate the substantive…