Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
V. Mosoti (2005)
Bilateral Investment Treaties and the Possibility of a Multilateral Framework on Investment at the WTO: Are Poor Economies Caught in BetweenNorthwestern journal of international law and business, 26
Lise Johnson, Lisa Sachs, J. Sachs (2015)
Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Public Interest and U.S. Domestic Law
A. Aaken, M. Waibel, Asha Kaushal, K. Chung, Claire Balchin (2010)
The International Investment Protection Regime Through the Lens of Economic Theory
LE Trakman (2014)
The status of investor – State arbitration: Resolving investment disputes under the transpacific partnership agreementJournal of World Trade, 48
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules
(1987)
World development indicators
(2014)
Investment treaty arbitration: Opportunities to reform arbitral rules and processes. International Institute for Sustainable Development
(2015)
Crisis, emergency measures and failure of the investor-state dispute settlement system: The case of Argentina
(2014)
Transatlantisches Handelsabkommen: Streitpunkt Investorenschutz
L. Trakman (2014)
The Status of Investor–State Arbitration: Resolving Investment Disputes Under the Transpacific Partnership AgreementTransnational Litigation/Arbitration
Todd Allee, Clint Peinhardt (2010)
Delegating Differences: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bargaining Over Dispute Resolution ProvisionsInternational Studies Quarterly, 54
(2014)
Allocation of costs in ICSID arbitration
Nathaniel Beck, Jonathan Katz, Richard Tucker (1998)
Taking Time Seriously: Time-Series-Cross-Section Analysis with a Binary Dependent VariableAmerican Journal of Political Science, 42
(2014)
Yukos owners win largest arbitration award in history against Russia for ‘Devious And Calculated’ Expropriation, blog entry dated July 28
United States State Department
Investor-state dispute settlement: A scoping paper for the investment policy community. OECD working paper on international investment
(2017)
Philip Morris Asia Limited v
Josh Robbins (2016)
The Achilles ' Heel Of Investor-State Arbitration Awards
This paper examines the pattern of settlements, investor wins and state wins in investor-state dispute settlement cases, focusing on the impact of arbitration rules, the resources and experience of the litigants, the type of treaty breach under investigation, and the pattern of state intervention. Logistic regression results show that settlements are more likely when investors do not disclose their allegations publicly, when the host state has been involved in a greater number of past cases, and when the respondent state has a higher control-of-corruption rating. Panel awards to investors are more likely in cases of alleged direct expropriation and less likely for indirect expropriation. Panel decisions favoring the state increase with higher per capita income and rule-of-law ratings.
International Advances in Economic Research – Springer Journals
Published: Feb 13, 2018
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.