International Economic Law and Policy Blog

Sign in Subscribe

Topic

NAFTA Chapter 11

15 posts

Federal Court of Canada hearing Canada's application to set aside Bilcon NAFTA award

For those that may have missed it, the NAFTA Bilcon v Canada dispute was back in the news this week. In 2015, the Claytons and Bilcon of Delaware, a US company, were awarded compensation for breaches of NAFTA Articles 1105 (fair and equitable treatment) and 1102 (national treatment). The dispute

A NAFTA proposal: fix the FET investment protection commitment*

With the NAFTA negotiations, investment lawyers, lawmakers, business groups, and civil society are waiting to see how Canada, Mexico, and the US will address the heated topic of investor-State arbitration, where an investor can claim compensation directly against a host state based on a treaty breach before an ad hoc

Simon Says ....

It is apparent that Simon, “our fearless leader” is keen to rely on titles to assist in the interpretation of articles and text in treaties. While titles may be of some assistance in certain circumstances the particular use of textual analysis doesn’t seem nearly as determinative as Simon seems

More from the Cargill NAFTA Chapter 11 Award: Damages for "Upstream" Losses

Here's more from the Cargill NAFTA Chapter 11 Award: Conclusion of the Tribunal with respect to the Scope of Loss to Claimant to be Included in the Model: Whether Cargill, Inc.'s Loss of Sales to Cargill de Mexico is a Separate Export Loss or a Part

Can Authorized Trade Retaliation Violate Investment Law Provisions?

A reader emailed expressing concern about the Cargill NAFTA Chapter 11 Award, in particular this part: 299. Reviewing closely the record of this case, the Tribunal finds ample support for the conclusion that the import permit was one of a series of measures expressly intended to injure United States HFCS

National Treatment in the NAFTA Chapter 11 Cargill Award

The Cargill v. Mexico NAFTA Chapter 11 award is available here. It was sent to the parties in September 2009, but it is just now being released publicly. In this post, I'm just going to make a quick point about the National Treatment analysis. When I first started

Grand River Enterprises Update

I talked about the non-discrimination aspects of the Grand River Enterprises NAFTA Chapter 11 dispute here, here and here. Based on the arguments made by the parties, I was hopeful that the decision would have something interesting to say about these issues. Alas, it was not to be. The decision

Grand River Enterprises: Discussion of National Treatment at the Hearing

Following up on some previous posts about the NAFTA Chapter 11 Grand River Enterprises dispute, the hearing in the case, held in early February, offered some interesting discussion of the National Treatment issue. Let me first turn to Luke Peterson of the Investment Arbitration Reporter for some background: The individual

Merrill & Ring v. Canada: More About NAFTA Ch. 11 Non-Discrimination Standards

Continuing with my occasional (although becoming somewhat frequent) posts on NAFTA Chapter 11 non-discrimination standards, there is a new decision to talk about: Merrill & Ring v. Canada. The basic facts, from the Tribunal: 26. This case concerns a claim by the Investor in respect of the implementation of Canada‘

NAFTA Non-Discrimination: The Corn Products Decision

Turning back to non-discrimination under NAFTA Chapter 11, which has become a recent obsession of mine, in addition to Grand River Enterprises, there is another NAFTA Chapter 11 case dealing with non-discrimination standards that is worth talking about: The Corn Products case (discussed on this blog by Luke Peterson just