This article provides historical context for the shift in the transnational legal order that governs mining in Colombia and has provoked an increasing number of socio-political conflicts, leading to ISDS claims.
The recently rendered decision in Eco Oro v. Colombia highlights many of the problems with policy exceptionalism. Most importantly, it suggests that states cannot, by larding their investment treaties with exceptions and carve-outs, simply avoid reckoning with the fundamental challenges facing the investment treaty system.
Eco Oro Minerals Corp. v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/41
Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/5
Sorry, this entry is only available in French and European Spanish.
The ways in which the investment protection regime frames disputes between states and investors misses that these disputes, particularly when they relate to the extractive industry, are embedded in complex social relations. This article calls for a reimagining of these disputes and efforts to resolve them.
Investment treaties and arbitration are argued, by proponents of the regime, to contribute to “good governance” in host states. This article, based on an empirical study of mining investments in the Colombian páramo, argues that the conception of good governance promoted by investment arbitration is incomplete and does not adequately consider the role of courts in providing checks and balances.
Glencore International A.G. and C.I. Prodeco S.A. v. Republic of Colombia, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/6
Tethyan Copper Company Pty Limited v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/1
ANGLO AMERICAN PLC V. BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA, ICSID CASE NO. ARB(AF)/14/1
SOUTH AMERICAN SILVER LIMITED (BERMUDA) V. THE PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA, PCA CASE NO. 2013-15
Cortec Mining Kenya Limited, Cortec (Pty) Limited and Stirling Capital Limited v. Republic of Kenya, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/29
This report provides clarity on key characteristics and challenges of local content policies. It does not attempt to propose one definition of local content.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/2 (Published in 2018 in International Investment Law and Sustainable Development: Key cases from the 2010s and on this website on […]
Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID Case No. ARB/12/40 (Published in 2018 in International Investment Law and Sustainable […]
Pac Rim Cayman LLC v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/12 (Published in 2018 in International Investment Law and Sustainable Development: Key cases from the 2010s and on this […]
Crystallex International Corporation v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/2 (Published in 2018 in International Investment Law and Sustainable Development: Key cases from the 2010s and on this website […]
The guidance focuses on mining sector local content policies—a suite of policies aimed at leveraging mining investment to, for example, increase local employment, boost mining companies’ local purchases and foster entrepreneurs in non-mining sectors.
Tanzania passed three new laws in July 2017 that significantly change the regulatory landscape governing natural resources. The reforms are aimed at ensuring that foreign investment benefits Tanzanian citizens.From an African perspective, this article argues that it is time to rethink investment treaty regimes to ensure that they do not hinder much-needed reforms.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21
ICSID tribunal dismisses claims brought against Indonesia based on forged mining licences Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID […]
Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID Case No. ARB/12/40 After rendering separate decisions on jurisdiction—one for the case brought […]
Renco Group Inc. v Republic of Peru, UNCT/13/1 An arbitral tribunal under the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) declared that U.S.-based investor Renco […]
Pac Rim Cayman LLC v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/12 On October 14, 2016, a tribunal at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) dismissed […]
Venezuela to Pay Us$1 Billion For Expropriating Canadian Mining Company’s Investment
ICSID Tribunal dismisses MFN Clause in WTO GATS as a means of importing Senegal’s consent to arbitration from third party BIT
PCA tribunal deemed acts of Polish Agricultural Property Agency not attributable to Poland
Claimant not considered Investor due to interpretation of “Seat” under Cyprus–Montenegro BIT
Ecuador’s Levy on extraordinary oil profits at a 99% rate has breached Murphy’s legitimate expectations, decides PCA tribunal
Ecuador ordered by PCA tribunal to pay $24 million to Canadian Mining Company
Copper Mesa Mining Corporation v. Republic of Ecuador, PCA No. 2012-2 – Matthew Levine
US$50 billion awards against Russia in Yukos Cases are set aside by Dutch Court
TTIP draft to be prepared by July; ISDS being built based on both EU and US proposals
China – US BIT: ISDS to be included; ongoing negotiations on negative lists
Three mining disputes: The first investment disputes against Colombia come to light
Canada-European Union CETA re-concluded in February to incorporate the EU ICS proposal
Second ICSID claim filed against Uruguay; Philip Morris decision still pending
Singapore International Arbitration centre releases investment arbitration rules
On February 19, 2016, Cosigo Resources (Canada) and Tobie Mining and Energy (United States) submitted an arbitration request against Colombia under the Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) concluded by Colombia with the United States and Canada.
Quiborax S.A. and Non-Metallic Minerals S.A. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia (ICSID Case No. ARB/06/2)
Adel A. Hamadi Al Tamimi v. Sultanate of Oman, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/33
This report synthesizes some of the key findings from the assessments and the capacity-building workshops.
PNG Sustainable Development Program Ltd. v. Independent State of Papua New Guinea, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/33
Khan Resources Inc., Khan Resources B.V. and CAUC Holding Company Ltd. v. The Government of Mongolia and MonAtom LLC, PCA Case No. 2011-09
William Ralph Clayton, William Richard Clayton, Douglas Clayton, Daniel Clayton and Bilcon of Delaware Inc. v. Government of Canada, UNCITRAL