Abstract
This chapter examines whether the notionally separate international economic policy regime devoted to protecting foreign investment against certain host-government regulations could affect the implementation of social policy norms and institutions at the regional, national or sub-national levels.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
S. Clarkson and A. Aidid (2013) ‘Researching International Norm Diffusion: Brazilian and Latin American Resistance to Investor-State Dispute Settlement’, Annual Congress of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, 6 April.
S. Clarkson and S. Wood (2010) A Perilous Imbalance: The Globalization of Canadian Law and Governance (Vancouver: University of British Colombia Press).
R. Dolzer (1985) Eigentum, Enteignung und Entschädigung im geltenden Völkerrecht (Berlin: Springer).
P. Eberhardt and C. Olivet (2012) Profiting from Injustice: How Law Firms, Arbitrators and Financiers Are Fuelling an Investment Arbitration Boom (Brussels and Amsterdam: Corporate Europe Observatory and the Transnational Institute).
Ernst & Young (2012) 2012 Attractiveness Survey: Brazil, http://tinyurl.com/o454wre, date accessed 23 January 2015.
Federal Register (2012) Notice of Termination of United States-Bolivia Bilateral Investment Treaty, https://federalregister.gov/a/2012-12494, date accessed 23 January 2015.
K. Gomez (2010) ‘Latin America and ICSID: David versus Goliath?’, University of Zarazoga Working Paper Series, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1708325, date accessed 20 January 2015.
C. Goodman (2007) ‘Uncharted Waters: Financial Crisis and Enforcement of ICSID Awards in Argentina’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 28(2), 449–484.
A. Gutierrez and B. Haderspock (2014) ‘Bolivia’, The Arbitration Review of the Americas, http://tinyurl.com/ogummo4, date accessed 23 January 2015.
S. Hindelang (2011) ‘Der primärrechtliche Rahmen einer EU-Investitions-schutzpolitik: Zulässigkeit und Grenzen von Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren aufgrund künftiger EU Abkommen’, in M. Bungenberg and C. Herrmann (eds.) Die Gemeinsame Handelspolitik der Europäischen Union nach Lissabon (Baden-Baden: Nomos).
S. Hindelang (2012a) ‘Contracting out — Circumventing Primacy of EU Law and the CJEU’s Judicial Monopoly by Resorting to Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Provided for in Inter-se Treaties? — The Case of Intra-EU Investment Arbitration’, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 39, 179–206.
S. Hindelang (2012b) ‘Member state BITs — There’s still (some) life in the old dog yet — Incompatibility of existing member state BITs with EU law and possible remedies’, in K. Sauvant (ed.) Yearbook on International Investment Law & Policy 2010–2011 (New York: Oxford University Press).
S. Hindelang (2013) ‘The autonomy of the European legal order — EU constitutional limits to investor-state arbitration on the basis of future EU investment-related agreements’, in M. Bungenberg and C. Herrmann (eds.) Common Commercial Policy after Lisbon, Special Issue to the European Yearbook of International Economic Law (Berlin: Springer).
S. Hindelang (2014) Study for the EP on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (‘ISDS’) and Alternatives of Dispute Resolution in International Investment Law (Brussels: European Union — Directorate General for External Policies of the Union), http://tinyurl.com/p6wa6wv, date accessed 20 January 2015.
R. Jijón-Letort and J. Marchán (2014) ‘Ecuador’, The Arbitration Review of the Americas, http://tinyurl.com/qzqwt65, date accessed 23 January 2015.
J. Kalicki and S. Medeiros (2008) ‘Investment Arbitration in Brazil, Revisiting Brazil’s Traditional Reluctance Towards ICSID, BITs and Investor-State Arbitration,’ vol. 24, Arbitration International, pp. 423–454.
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP (2009) Litigation, http://www.milbank.com/images/content/5/7/573.pdf, date accessed 23 January 2015.
N. Rubins and B. Auterburg (2010) ‘Independence, impartiality and duty of disclosure in investment arbitration’, in C. Knahr, C. Koller, W. Echberger and A. Reinisch (eds.) Investment and Commercial Arbitration — Similarities and Divergences (The Hague: Eleven International Publishing).
H. Smith Freehills (2013a) ‘Argentina Settles Five Outstanding Investment Treaty Arbitration Claims in Historic Break with Its Anti-Enforcement Stance’, Arbitration Notes, http://tinyurl.com/q9oy684, date accessed 23 January 2015.
H. Smith Freehills (2013b) ‘Ecuador to Establish Commission to Audit Bilateral Investment Treaties’, Arbitration Notes, http://tinyurl.com/o552t3a, date accessed 23 January 2015.
C. Tomuschat (2004) ‘Art. 281 Vertrag zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft (EGV)’, in H. von der Groeben and J. Schwarze (eds.) Vertrag über die Europäische Union (EUV)/EGV (Baden-Baden: Nomos).
S. Trew (2012) ‘Bolivia Terminates Bilateral Investment Treaty with U.S. as Pakistan Questions FIPA Negotiations with Canada’, The Council of Canadians, http://canadians.org/node/4452, date accessed 23 January 2015.
G. Van Harten (2010) ‘Investment treaty arbitration, procedural fairness, and the rule of law’, in S. Schill (ed.) International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
G. Van Harten (2012) ‘Arbitrator Behaviour in Asymmetrical Adjudication: An Empirical Study of Investment Treaty Arbitration’, Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 50(1), 212.
D. Wei (2012) ‘Bilateral Investment Treaties: An Empirical Analysis of the Practices of Brazil and China’, European Journal of Law and Economics, 33, 663–690.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 Stephen Clarkson and Steffen Hindelang
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clarkson, S., Hindelang, S. (2016). How Parallel Lines Intersect: Investor-State Dispute Settlement and Regional Social Policies. In: Bianculli, A.C., Hoffmann, A.R. (eds) Regional Organizations and Social Policy in Europe and Latin America. Development, Justice and Citizenship Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137490353_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137490353_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-57095-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-49035-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)