Apr 12, 2016
A recent article by Luis Millan in The Lawyers Weekly examines the pros and cons of the new court-like system that has been introduced for settling disputes between investors and states under the European Union-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). The new approach represents a break from the controversial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system that currently exists under the North American Free Trade Agreement. According to the article, international trade and investment lawyers are divided over the establishment of this different system. Riyaz Dattu, partner in Osler’s International Trade and Investment Law group, is in favour of the new permanent, multilateral investment court.
“We need to move away from a purely ad hoc system to one that has an institutional framework,” Riyaz explains. “This is necessarily a progression from viewing disputes as being purely commercial, because they are not. They impact in a very significant way the workings of a government.”
The new system will also include the establishment of an appellate tribunal, which most experts – including Riyaz -- view as a positive development: “The appellate body is needed because it will result in the formulation of legal principles that will provide uniformity and predictability,” he comments.
Read Luis Millan’s full article Investment court plan gets mixed reviews at The Lawyers Weekly, April 8, 2016.