Is there a Need for Investor-State Arbitration in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)?

Abstract

This short paper analyses the legal arguments forwarded by the European Commission to justify the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the current negotiations with the U.S. on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), notably U.S. cases that would show deficiencies of the U.S. judicial system that would need to be overcome by ISDS. Also discussed is whether ISDS would be necessary to overcome legal obstacles to ensure that U.S. courts give effect to the substantive investor protection provisions of TTIP. The paper concludes that these concerns are not sufficiently substantiated to show a need for ISDS in TTIP.

Keywords: ISDS, TTIP, international arbitration, investment law, judicial reform

JEL Classification: F13, K33, K40