International Commercial Law - Investor-State Arbitration: Introduction

1. A beverage company from country F was operating in country G when civil unrest broke out. The government of country G took no steps to protect the company’s assets, which were destroyed in the violence. Under ISDS, what protection could the investor invoke?

2. A Canadian investor invested in a factory in country W. The government of W later nationalized the factory, arguing that it was in the public interest. The investor was compensated at a value far below market rates. Which principle under ISDS is the investor most likely to invoke in their claim?

3. A company from country N has discovered that the state where they invested in an infrastructure project gave better terms to a competitor from country O, even though both were operating under similar conditions. Which ISDS principle could the company invoke?

4. A telecom company from country A enters into a contract with country B to expand its mobile network. The contract includes an arbitration clause specifying ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL rules. Which of the following is a potential challenge with ad hoc arbitration?

5. An investor from country X has built a luxury resort in country Y. Recently, country Y passed a law that significantly reduced the value of the resort by restricting tourism activities in the area. The investor believes this amounts to an indirect expropriation. Which forum would likely be the best venue for the investor to seek compensation, provided both countries are signatories to the ICSID Convention?

6. A foreign investor has chosen ICSID as the forum for resolving a dispute with the government of country M. If country M refuses to comply with the final arbitration award, what is the investor’s best course of action to ensure enforcement?

7. An Italian energy company entered into a joint venture with the government of country Z to build a solar power plant. However, due to political changes, country Z canceled the contract without compensation. Which source of law would the company most likely rely on to bring an ISDS claim?

8. A U.S. investor claims that country R introduced discriminatory regulations that unfairly target their tech company, making it impossible for them to operate in the market. The investor believes the state violated their treaty protections. Which ISDS principle would be most relevant in this case?

9. A state-owned enterprise from country J enters into an investment agreement with a multinational corporation from country P. The corporation sues the state-owned enterprise for breach of contract, but the state denies being bound by the arbitration clause. What might the corporation argue to establish the state’s responsibility for the arbitration?

10. A group of foreign bondholders sues country T for failing to pay its sovereign debt. Country T argues that the bonds do not qualify as an “investment” under ISDS. Which test might the bondholders invoke to prove their investment qualifies as protected under ISDS?