Investor–state dispute settlement mechanisms were intended to protect companies from the Global North against expropriation by South countries. Since 2000, investor–state have increasingly been used Northern countries obtain compensation for and constrain policy decisions around nationalisation remunicipalisation, as well environmental or social regulation of service provision that threatens co...

Phase two of the negotiations on African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) has begun. This phase includes negotiating protocol investment. The International Investment Regime (IIR) allows foreign investors to institute proceedings against states through Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), which is criticised as undergoing a ‘legitimacy crisis’. paper assesses legitimacy ISDS evaluate w...

International investment agreements have provoked intense criticism in the policy debate during recent years. Particularly contentious has been their “ISDS” mechanisms, which enable investors to bring disputes against host countries. This paper examines whether countries would be better off with state-state dispute settlement (SSDS), as often alleged, assuming that SSDS cause political/diplomat...

The Belt and Road Initiative has the potential to update current investment dispute settlement mechanism established by China its partner countries. According practical contexts of region, this article evaluates trade-offs associated with existing, emerging, proposed mechanisms, including informal means, domestic courts, interstate ISDS (Investor-State Dispute Settlement), regional court intern...

This article analyses intellectual property (IP) disputes in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) through the lenses of Third World approaches to international law (TWAIL) and how a reformist TWAIL approach might be used address concerns related IP-ISDS disputes. It has three objectives. First, discuss its readings IP. Using framework, illustrates TWAILers’ positions on Agreement Trade-Rela...