Investor Presentaiton

39 include disputes not involving an alleged violation of the IIA. Depending on other limitations on a tribunal's authority, such as those that might be found in the applicable law clause, these disputes could include alleged violations of customary international law, investment contracts and possibly even the domestic law of the host State. (ii) Claims alleging a violation of an IIA Other ISDS clauses are worded more narrowly and refer only to those disputes where an investor alleges the breach of the treaty. For example, the India-Republic of Korea FTA (2009), Article 10.21, provides: "This Article shall apply to disputes between a Party and an investor of the other Party concerning an alleged breach of an obligation of the former Party under this Chapter, which causes loss or damage to the investor or its investments. (Emphasis added). " This is a more circumscribed formulation that precludes a tribunal's jurisdiction over those non-treaty-based claims that reference to "all disputes" may allow. The causes of action that a tribunal will have jurisdiction over will ordinarily be those obligations found in the investment agreement, such as the obligation to accord national treatment to investments, to accord fair and equitable treatment, and to expropriate property only upon payment of compensation and certain other conditions. In addition, it imposes the requirement that State conduct must cause loss or damage to the investor, a condition that must ordinarily be met in any case for an investor to be entitled to compensation. (iii) Naming specific obligations that can be subject to ISDS Some treaties identify, by means of a positive list, specific obligations whose violation can be a cause of action in an investor's UNCTAD Series on International Investment Agreements II

View entire presentation