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).

Photo: Aqua Mechanical / CC BY 2.0

(March 2020)

Euractiv | 7-Mar-2023
Environmental organisations are threatening to bring about a court challenge to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between the EU and Canada, just as the ratification of the agreement is set to be on the agenda.
The Hindu BusinessLine | 7-Feb-2023
The Supreme Court of Netherlands refused to overturn $111.3 million arbitral award levied by the District Court of Hague, finding the Indian government liable for improperly terminating the Devas-Antrix deal in 2011.
News5 | 27-Jan-2023
Since the company is registered in the Cayman Islands, a British Overseas Territory, it cites the Bilateral Investment Treaty between Belize and the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Armenpress | 27-Jan-2023
This arbitration case related to the construction of the railway and highway construction projects was initiated in accordance with the investment treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Armenia.
Caribbean National Weekly | 25-Jan-2023
The developers of the hotel project in Grenada say while an amiable settlement remains open, the “extensive damage to the project caused by the actions of the former government has severely complicated and handicapped the efforts towards settlement.
Telecompaper | 24-Jan-2023
The US-based company Providence Equity Partners claims that certain actions by national public service regulator SPRK indicate a possible violation of the bilateral investment agreement between the US and Latvian governments.
The Conversation | 23-Jan-2023
A relatively new strategy for China is to challenge national security decisions before international tribunals using a method called investor-state dispute settlement.
El Pais | 18-Jan-2023
La empresa pública madrileña busca una indemnización por la pérdida de su principal inversión en Latinoamérica.
CIAR Global | 16-Jan-2023
El Gobierno de Perú ha informado del resultado favorable obtenido en el arbitraje disputado con la compañía Panamericana Televisión SA bajo administración de la Corte Permanente de Arbitraje y sometido a reglas UNCITRAL.
IISD | 9-Jan-2023
Le tribunal a rejeté l’objection de la Bolivie sur la compétence et, sur le fond, a conclu que la Bolivie avait violé la norme TJE et l’interdiction d’adopter des mesures arbitraires. BBVA s’est vu attribuer 94,8 millions USD en dommages-intérêts.

0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 | ... | 300