By empowering investors to sue states, the world’s web of 3,000-plus investment treaties has made arbitration the dominant form of dispute resolution involving states. Supporters make a strong case that it has promoted the rule of law and the flow of investment.
The greatest weakness of the treaty system is the appearance of bias. Alas, the critiques of arbitrator independence have gone unheeded, and they are only growing louder. A study by the system’s leading academic critic, Gus Van Harten of Toronto’s Osgoode Hall Law School, concluded that treaty arbitrators find in favor of investors on key jurisdictional issues about three-quarters of the time.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
