In recent years, investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) has been accused of, among other things, bias towards investors, encroaching on state sovereignty, and being too slow and costly.
Gisèle Stephens-Chu, Joaquin P. Terceño, and Alex Wilbrahem examine the criticisms and how ISDS is changing in response, including procedural reforms, plans for a new investment court system and efforts to rebalance rights and obligations between states and investors.
Inside the Freshfields Hub
Europe decides: the new EU Commission's agenda
Top 40 US public M&A deals survey
A global guide to data ethics
Can you own AI?
International arbitration #1: the complete guide to arbitration funding
Global investigations #4: protecting the whistleblowers
Global investigations #3: defending multiple fronts (part 2)
Europe decides: the impact of Brexit
Europe decides: what the elections mean for business
FS market conduct #1: double jeopardy – where market misconduct and anti-competitive behaviour meet
Global investigations #3: defending multiple fronts (part 1)
How will Brexit affect... employees?
How will Brexit affect… contracts?
Investing in startups
Global investigations #2: why do things go wrong?
How will Brexit affect… competition law?
How lawyers can help mitigate cyber risk
Global investigations #1: responding to suspect activity
Tech IPOs – what can we expect in 2019?
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free
The Commercial Edge: Unleash the Power of People
The emPOWERed Half Hour
U.S Property Podcast
Aligned Money Show
Gorse Culture PODcast : The H.R. Detective Agency!
The Ramsey Show
Planet Money