7 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2019
    1. New Zealand has sought, through a series of side letters with other members of that agreement, to disapply the investor-state dispute settlement provisions of that agreement. I would be delighted if the Secretary of State said that he is going to do the same. Will the UK be seeking ISDS provisions in trade agreements with Australia, New Zealand and the United States, despite the fact that, as he said, the Secretary of State believes they should not be necessary“under systems such as the UK’s
    2. The UK as well as the EU have been at the forefront of improving the investor-state dispute settlement system and its transparency; in particular we supported the UNCITRAL—United Nations Commission on International Trade Law—rules on transparency that became effective in 2014. We have always seen this as being a necessary part of agreements, but we do absolutely agree that transparency is one of the ways that will give greater public confidence in the system itself.

      isds = neccessary although reformable?

    3. I would like to see us use outward direct investment to help some of the poorest countries develop the ability to add value to their primary commodities; and I would like then for us to be able to use our freedoms in tariff policy to be able to reduce those tariffs on those value-added goods.

      hmm. investment? taariffs?

  2. Jun 2016
    1.    (xv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion, while benefiting from no greater rights than domestic investors, and to replace the ISDS system with a new system for resolving disputes between investors and states which is subject to democratic principles and scrutiny, where potential cases are treated in a transparent manner by publicly appointed, independent professional judges in public hearings and which includes an appellate mechanism, where consistency of judicial decisions is ensured, the jurisdiction of courts of the EU and of the Member States is respected, and where private interests cannot undermine public policy objectives;

      We should look no further than the European Parliament when wondering whether the ISDS is an effective system for dispute resolution!

    1. $50 billion award grant-ed by an arbitration tribunal in July 2014 to three shareholders in Russian oil company Yukos against the Russian government.

      Background here

    2. In the infamous suit brought by Vattenfall against the German government over its decision to phase out nuclear power by the year 2022, described in the original text of this booklet, reports now suggest that the total amount claimed in damages by the Swedish energy company may exceed €5 bil-lion, once interest payments are taken into account.

      This is a key example of how the principle of "Denial of Justice" in TTIP can be quite problematic. [Source article]