A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA

Gloria Maria Alvarez; Blazej  Blasikiewicz; Tabe  Van Hoolwerff; Mary  Mitsi; Kleopatra Koutouzi; Nikos  Lavranos; Emma  Spiteri-Gonzi; Adrian  Videgaray; Piotr Willinski

A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA

Gloria Maria Alvarez, Blazej Blasikiewicz, Tabe Van Hoolwerff, Mary Mitsi, Kleopatra Koutouzi, Nikos Lavranos, Emma Spiteri-Gonzi, Adrian Videgaray , Piotr Willinski

Law

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

62 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article analyses the validity of some of the most often-heard criticism against ISDS. It concludes that most of that criticism is neither supported by statistical evidence nor by the practice of international arbitration law. Consequently, this article cautions against the current hyper-activism to reform or even to dismantle some of the salient features of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and instead, calls for a rational and balanced debate based on facts with a view to improving the ISDS system where necessary in an orderly fashion.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-36
Number of pages	36
Journal	Journal of International Arbitration
Volume	33
Issue number	1
Publication status	Published - 31 Dec 2016

Keywords

ISDS
Investor-State arbitration
European Union Law
European Commission
international arbitration
international investment law
dispute settlement
energy law

Access to Document

A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA_
Reprinted from Journal of International Arbitration , 33, 2016, 1-36, with permission of Kluwer Law International.
Accepted author manuscript, 279 KBLicence: Other

http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=JOIA2016001

Gloria Alvarez
- School of Law, Law - Senior Lecturer
Person: Academic

Cite this

@article{2a73feb2fe1641dab770f2392b232038,

title = "A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA",

abstract = "This article analyses the validity of some of the most often-heard criticism against ISDS. It concludes that most of that criticism is neither supported by statistical evidence nor by the practice of international arbitration law. Consequently, this article cautions against the current hyper-activism to reform or even to dismantle some of the salient features of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and instead, calls for a rational and balanced debate based on facts with a view to improving the ISDS system where necessary in an orderly fashion.",

keywords = "ISDS, Investor-State arbitration , European Union Law, European Commission , international arbitration , international investment law, dispute settlement , energy law ",

author = "Alvarez, {Gloria Maria} and Blazej Blasikiewicz and {Van Hoolwerff}, Tabe and Mary Mitsi and Kleopatra Koutouzi and Nikos Lavranos and Emma Spiteri-Gonzi and Adrian Videgaray and Piotr Willinski",

year = "2016",

month = dec,

day = "31",

language = "English",

volume = "33",

pages = "1--36",

journal = "Journal of International Arbitration ",

issn = "0255-8106",

publisher = "Kluwer Law International ",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA

AU - Alvarez, Gloria Maria

AU - Blasikiewicz, Blazej

AU - Van Hoolwerff, Tabe

AU - Mitsi, Mary

AU - Koutouzi, Kleopatra

AU - Lavranos, Nikos

AU - Spiteri-Gonzi, Emma

AU - Videgaray , Adrian

AU - Willinski, Piotr

PY - 2016/12/31

Y1 - 2016/12/31

N2 - This article analyses the validity of some of the most often-heard criticism against ISDS. It concludes that most of that criticism is neither supported by statistical evidence nor by the practice of international arbitration law. Consequently, this article cautions against the current hyper-activism to reform or even to dismantle some of the salient features of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and instead, calls for a rational and balanced debate based on facts with a view to improving the ISDS system where necessary in an orderly fashion.

AB - This article analyses the validity of some of the most often-heard criticism against ISDS. It concludes that most of that criticism is neither supported by statistical evidence nor by the practice of international arbitration law. Consequently, this article cautions against the current hyper-activism to reform or even to dismantle some of the salient features of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and instead, calls for a rational and balanced debate based on facts with a view to improving the ISDS system where necessary in an orderly fashion.

KW - ISDS

KW - Investor-State arbitration

KW - European Union Law

KW - European Commission

KW - international arbitration

KW - international investment law

KW - dispute settlement

KW - energy law

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 1

EP - 36

JO - Journal of International Arbitration

JF - Journal of International Arbitration

SN - 0255-8106

IS - 1

ER -

A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Profiles

Gloria Alvarez

Cite this