Services

Utility corporations have used investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions found in trade and investment agreements to challenge state attempts to regulate privatized public services such as water, social security or other services.

In response to several governments which have tried to lower public services rates for poorer populations or in face of a significant economic crisis, foreign companies have initiated ISDS disputes, claiming they were treated “unfairly”, due to their loss of profits.

Potentially, any significant reforms of standards in relation to major infrastructure or utilities and associated services could be the target of ISDS.

As of end of 2019, about 2/3 of all ISDS disputes concerned the services sector at large, including public services but also financial services, telecommunications, transport, construction, etc.

Most well-known disputes include:

• Azurix (US) v. Argentina: US$165 million awarded in 2006 to the investor, a water company. The dispute arose from the contamination of a reservoir, which made the water undrinkable in the area. The firm claimed the government had expropriated its investment and denied the firm “fair and equitable treatment” by not allowing rate increases and not investing sufficient public funds in the water infrastructure (Argentina-US BIT invoked).

• Tampa Electric Company “TECO” (US) vs. Guatemala: the US-based energy company challenged Guatemala’s decision to lower the electricity rates that a private utility could charge. TECO was awarded US$25 million in 2013 (CAFTA invoked).

• TCW (US) vs. Dominican Republic: the US investment management corporation that jointly owned with the government one of the Dominican Republic’s three electricity distribution firms, sued the government for failing to raise electricity rates and to prevent electricity theft by poor residents. Case settled in 2009 for US$26.5 million paid to the investor (CAFTA invoked).

(March 2020)

CCSI | 23-Sep-2020
It appears that investors are using investment treaties in ways that can significantly frustrate government efforts to effectively and adequately regulate public private partnerships in the public interest.
TSA | 22-Sep-2020
L’Algérie a obtenu une « victoire définitive » contre le milliardaire égyptien Naguib Sawiris dans l’affaire Djezzy.
International Law Office | 17-Sep-2020
The tribunal held that the Mexican authorities had not violated international commercial law or breached their commitments under treaties to which they were a party.
The Economic Times | 2-Sep-2020
Seclink Technologies, funded by the royal families of the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, plans to seek arbitration over the issue under the Bilateral Investment Promotion Protection Agreement.
CMS | 10-Aug-2020
A recent ICSID tribunal has denied an investor’s claim concerning the development of an airport project in Latvia, which may have wider implications for infrastructure projects that may now be under feasibility reviews as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.
SeeNews | 6-Aug-2020
The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce has suspended the termination of the Chisinau International Airport concession contract until it reaches a final decision on the case.
CIAR Global | 27-Jul-2020
La Superintendencia de Servicios Sanitarios (SISS) de Chile ha rechazado la solicitud de la compañía española Suez para interrumpir el proceso de caducidad de la Empresa de Servicios Sanitarios de Los Lagos S.A. (ESSAL), que tiene su origen en la interrupción del suministro de agua en la ciudad de Osorno en julio de 2019.
The Print | 6-Jul-2020
India has a Bilateral Investment Treaty with China since 2007. The treaty provides foreign investors the right to fair and equitable treatment.
IIED | 22-Jun-2020
International investment law and investor dispute arbitration too often fail to notice the concerns of local actors. Governance of these international mechanisms needs to take a more holistic, development-based view of the issues.
Chile Mejor sin TLC | 19-Jun-2020
Quieren transformarse en víctimas y denunciar al Estado de Chile para no asumir los costos y que se les compense por supuestas pérdidas económicas, esto es posible por los TLCs y acuerdos de protección de inversiones que Chile ha suscrito

0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 | ... | 190