Latin America and ICSID: David versus Goliath?

Gómez, Fach; Katia,

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1708325

Cited by 20 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 2003, Argentina has turned to nationalism. His government justified this new policy in order to restore the balance of payments, reduce inflation, and promote employment [43]. This nationalist policy culminated in the nationalization of YPF in 2012.…”

Section: Fdi In Argentina and The Effects Of Nationalization On Foreimentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving Conflict between Parties and Consequences for Foreign Direct Investment: The Repsol-YPF Case in Argentina

Fernández‐González

Arce²,

Gil

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2012, the Argentine government expropriated 51% of the shares of Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales S.A. (YPF) from the Spanish company Repsol S.A. The YPF was nationalized without prior compensation, violating Argentina’s own laws and, consequently, the institutional framework in force in the country. As a consequence, the country’s reputation deteriorated and, although there were several contacts with multinational enterprises to become YPF’s new partner, the investment climate was affected, making it really difficult to attract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). In order to attract these investments after the expropriation, the Argentine government understands that it is necessary to settle the legal proceedings with Repsol. In order to avoid an imperfect judicial procedure of long duration and with high transaction costs, both parties reached a settlement agreement. This paper presents an institutional economic analysis of expropriation, contextualizing it within the Argentine institutional framework and studying the trajectory of the nationalization of YPF. In this way, it seeks to contextualize institutionally the Argentine government’s decision and the impact it has had on both the FDI and the credibility of the country’s institutional framework. It also analyzes how the resolution of the conflict occurs through an agreement between the parties that avoids the judicial process, given its high transaction costs.

show abstract

Section: Fdi In Argentina and The Effects Of Nationalization On Foreimentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving Conflict between Parties and Consequences for Foreign Direct Investment: The Repsol-YPF Case in Argentina

Fernández‐González

Arce²,

Gil

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Developing states and Third World scholars criticise the international system of investment dispute mechanism for various reasons (Van Harten, 2007;Gómez, 2012). In particular, it is argued that public policy issues should not be settled by arbitrators due to both a tendency of inconsistency and biased decision-making (Van Harten, 2007).…”

Section: African East-asian Affairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, it is argued that public policy issues should not be settled by arbitrators due to both a tendency of inconsistency and biased decision-making (Van Harten, 2007). It is further pointed out that non-commercial interests are generally not adequately taken into consideration such as human rights or environmental protection (Gómez, 2012;Odumosu, 2007).…”

Section: African East-asian Affairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power and Justice in International Investment Law: China’s Rise and Its Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations vis-à-vis the African Host State Population

Hankings-Evans¹

2016

AEAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing economic engagement of emerging states such as China raises concerns, especially in Western scholarly work, as to the growing influence and negative impact of China on international law. South-South investment relations are especially being put under heightened scrutiny. In this regard, it has been argued that the rise in economic legalisation efforts, for instance the signing of BITs, would politically alter the balance of power between developed and developing states. The present article intends to take a closer look at the human rights implications of Chinese investment agreements with African states. It, therefore, firstly identifies a lack of justice-based provisions that hinders the systemic integration of human rights law and international investment law. Secondly, it suggests that China's human rights approach when engaging in investment relations does not necessarily differ from investment approaches of traditional partners since China utilises the underlying power implications by Westernising its investment treaties. Yet, the overall failed integration of justice considerations into international investment law must rather be considered a result of both structural deficiencies and colonial legacy, a legacy that till today hinders essentially the implementation of policy space, human rights and the right to development.

show abstract

Litigating the Crisis: Towards a Rebalancing of the Rights of Investors Versus Public Interest?

Goodwin

Paiement

2021

The New Common

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter reflects on the anticipated rush by private corporations to seek compensation from states for emergency measures taken to address the current health crisis. Where states have, for example, commandeered privately run health facilities, foreign corporations can claim for any negative impact on their current and future profits. This anticipated wave of state-investor litigation draws upon the web of bilateral investment treaties that span the globe and on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. In place of a “new normal,” this short paper suggests that these threats represent an intensification of an existing trend, with the main difference being that states of the Global North are increasingly finding themselves disciplined by instruments that they created to protect their own companies abroad. If this happens, as seems likely, this crisis will add to the growing calls to rethink how we regulate the boundary between the public interest and private investors.

show abstract

Latin America and ICSID: David versus Goliath?

Cited by 20 publications

References 7 publications

Resolving Conflict between Parties and Consequences for Foreign Direct Investment: The Repsol-YPF Case in Argentina

Resolving Conflict between Parties and Consequences for Foreign Direct Investment: The Repsol-YPF Case in Argentina

Power and Justice in International Investment Law: China’s Rise and Its Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations vis-à-vis the African Host State Population

Litigating the Crisis: Towards a Rebalancing of the Rights of Investors Versus Public Interest?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About