Programme Policy Brief No 2011/1 (European University Institute 2011) 1 < http://globalgovernanceprogramme.eui.eu/wp-content/themes/NewEuitemplate/Documents/Publications/PolicyBriefs/PolicyBrief20111final.pdf > accessed 17 February 2017.
68 For an overview, see Laurens Ankersmit, ‘InvestmentCourtSystem
-state arbitration by a new investmentcourtsystem based on a Tribunal of First Instance (composed of 15 public law judges: 5 judges from EU member states, five judges from the United States, and five judges from third countries) and a permanent Appeal Tribunal composed of 6 public law judges (two from EU member
announcing its Proposal for a Council Decision on CETA, the European Commission described this ‘new investmentcourtsystem’ as an important first step ‘towards the EU’s ultimate goal of a global investment court’. 42
Both the EU’s proposal and India’s Model BIT, discussed below, aim to reform ISDS by
started replacing ISDS in all its trade and investment negotiations with a permanent ‘InvestmentCourtSystem’. 87 The final goal of the EU is thus to merge in the future all bilateral and potentially plurilateral courts into the MIC. The European Commission envisages the MIC as an institution analogous
whether the provisions of the
eu -Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (‘
’) regarding the InvestmentCourtSystem (‘ ics ’) are compatible with eu law.
Based on this previous case-law on the principle, it is possible that the cjeu would find that the fra or wa
-death-of-isds ; Louise Woods, “Fit for purpose? The EU’s InvestmentCourtSystem,” Kluwer Arbitration Blog, (blog), March 23 2016, 2018, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2016/03/23/to-be-decided/ . See further Bonnitcha, Poulsen, and Waibel, The Political Economy of the Investment Treaty Regime , 30.
successful example of the WTO dispute settlement system with its ad hoc panels and a small, but permanent Appellate Body has not been taken up in recent discussions about the reform of investor-state arbitration. The “InvestmentCourt”-system contained in the proposals for CETA and TTIP is not yet
’s suggested multilateral investmentcourtsystem – but perhaps due to the sweeping nature of those reforms, they have failed to garner much support. 120 But their failure may actually provide ACIIL’s negotiators with an opportunity to market the center as a comparatively discrete and less-expensive means for
Part of this Chapter, the European Union’s initiative for an InvestmentCourtSystem as the most tangible reform proposal (which incorporates the doctrinal proposals discussed in Parts 1 and 2) is outlined and scrutinized. 1 Abolishment or Modification of the System of Party-appointments Disputing
of an investmentcourtsystem, a controversial proposal within the broader movement to reform isds . The analysis of the eusfta ’s departure from ceta and the euvfta in Section 4 below will show that the eusfta seems to be carefully designed to ensure clarity, certainty, transparency, and