The interaction between investment disputes and human rights due diligence

The interaction between investment disputes and human rights due diligence

On 4 December 2019, the newly-established Human Rights Due Diligence Forum of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law convened its first meeting. The topic was the interaction between investment disputes and human rights due diligence. The main focus of the meeting was on the implications of newly adopted or proposed laws on human…

Counterclaims in investor-state disputes: time for the system to change?

Counterclaims in investor-state disputes: time for the system to change?

At a fully-packed BIICL event on 6 November 2020, we discussed counterclaims in investor-state disputes. DLA Piper and the Investment Treaty Forum brought together an excellent panel to discuss the complexities of asserting counterclaims, including jurisdictional, substantive and enforcement aspects of it: Michael Ostrove, David Herlihy, Alison Macdonald and Dainis Pudelis from the State Chancellery…

Appointment of International Judges and Arbitrators: Perspectives from Different Institutions

Appointment of International Judges and Arbitrators: Perspectives from Different Institutions

On 18 October  2019, we put together a joint BIICL/University of Liverpool event on the appointment of international judges and arbitrators. The idea was to look at common trends and divergences between various international courts and tribunals with a particular focus on legitimacy and the rule of law. Diversity as legitimacy I presented my views…

Valuation of damages in investment disputes – conference takeaways

Valuation of damages in investment disputes – conference takeaways

On 18 October 2019,  we organised a conference on the valuation of damages in international investment law. This topic is far from being theoretical as slight differences in the methodology of calculation of damages can lead to giant differences in sums awarded. For example, in the controversial Tethyan v. Pakistan case earlier this year, Pakistan…

Can Regulatory Freedom Justify Indirect Expropriation in Investment Arbitration?

Can Regulatory Freedom Justify Indirect Expropriation in Investment Arbitration?

States can regulate as part of their sovereignty and can give away a part of their regulatory freedom by making commitments to foreign investors, such as the obligation to compensate investors for expropriation. Unless a treaty removes or modifies a particular norm of international law, international law on expropriation, including customary law, should apply. The real challenge…

ICSID Arbitration Reform: Mapping Concerns of Users and How to Address Them

ICSID Arbitration Reform: Mapping Concerns of Users and How to Address Them

On 13 November 2018, ICSID presented its new proposed amendments at a major conference in London. This round of amendments aims, among other things, to modernize the ICSID procedure based on case experience, simplify the rules, and make the process increasingly time and cost-effective while maintaining due process and a balance between investors and States.…