I elaborate below on the Notes from various chapters in my book, Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal with China, that referred readers to this blog: https://gusvanharten.wordpress.com/. The post is also available as a pdf: Extended notes. Chapter 1 More than 90 per cent of money awarded appears to have gone to very … Continue reading Sold Down the Yangtze: Extended notes for various chapters
In Chapter 26 of my book Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal with China, I said that I’d post on this blog a copy of my complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council and the Council’s response. Here they are: CJC complaint and .
In Chapter 34 of my book Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal with China, I said that I’d post on this blog an outline of the Canada-China FIPA’s complex loophole on most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment and how this loophole undermines the FIPA’s moderating language in other areas. The FIPA has provisions that appear to … Continue reading Sold Down the Yangtze: Extended note for chapter 34
In Chapter 31 of my book Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal with China, I said that I’d post on this blog a longer description of the AbitibiBowater v Canada case, which is sometimes cited by foreign investors lawyers as an example of why ISDS works well or is needed. The case was … Continue reading Sold Down the Yangtze: Extended note for chapter 31
In Chapter 25 of my book Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal with China, I said that I’d post on this blog the full excerpts from my cross-examination in the Hupacasath First Nation’s legal challenge to the Canada-China FIPA, as cited by the federal government to argue that I was a partial expert … Continue reading Sold Down the Yangtze: Extended note for chapter 25
This comment was first published in The Tyee. The best thing about NAFTA 2.0 is that Canada’s economy survived Donald Trump’s volatility. The next best thing is that it will soon reinvigorate our sovereignty. Three years after new NAFTA replaces old NAFTA, the agreement’s special protections for foreign investors will be removed. That is something … Continue reading New NAFTA ends ISDS between Canada and U.S.
This post is by David Schneiderman (University of Toronto), Kyla Tienhaara (Australian National University), and Gus Van Harten (Osgoode Hall Law School). We respond to the European Federation of Investment Law and Arbitration (EFILA) paper called “A Response to the Criticism Against ISDS” (17 May 2015). EFILA is a pro-ISDS group that appears primarily to … Continue reading Reply to EFILA
In Chapter 26 of my book Sold Down the Yangtze: Canada’s Lopsided Investment Deal With China, I said that I’d post on this blog documents from my complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) and the CJC’s reply. The documents are attached below. They include items mentioned elsewhere in the Notes for my book, such … Continue reading Sold Down the Yangtze: Documents for CJC complaint
It is important that states’ decision-making about ISDS not be seen to have been captured by the ISDS legal industry. That is especially so when questions about the legality of ISDS come before courts, whose decision-making is expected to be separated from interested actors in legal and political debates. Observers of the ISDS debate in Europe … Continue reading The ISDS legal industry and the European Court of Justice
This open letter (version francais) was sent today by Canadian academics, including myself, to the Parliament of Wallonia and Belgian voters. We wrote the letter on Sunday, October 16, after seeing weekend reports of the pressure tactics employed by Canadian politicians and business representatives to influence Wallonia’s decision-making on the CETA. The academics who signed the letter … Continue reading Canadian academics’ open letter on the CETA and Wallonia/ lettre ouverte a propos du CETA et La Wallonie
investor-state dispute settlement 