Does the CPTPP achieve the necessary balance between Investment Protection and Regulatory Discretion?

L. Carroll
Carroll, Lee

Article from: TDM 5 (2019), in Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)

Introduction

The inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in international investment agreements has become contentious around the world. In Australia, the concern intensified after Philip Morris Asia sued the Australian government in 2011 under the Hong Kong-Australia BIT challenging Australia's tobacco plain-packaging legislation. Critics believe the inclusion of ISDS in international investment agreements compromises a government's sovereignty by enabling foreign corporations to sue a government for passing new laws or implementing new policies - effectively, domestic ...

To read this article you need to be a subscriber

Sign in

Forgot password?

Sign in

Subscribe

Fill in the registration form and answer a few simple questions to receive a quote.

Subscribe now

Why subscribe?

TDM journal

Access to TDM Journal articles (well over 2500 articles in total for Premium account holders)

Legal & regulatory

Access to Legal & Regulatory data (well over 10000 documents)

OGEMID

OGEMID membership (lively discussion platform bringing together the world's international dispute management community)

Suggested Citation

L. Carroll; "Does the CPTPP achieve the necessary balance between Investment Protection and Regulatory Discretion?"
TDM 5 (2019), www.transnational-dispute-management.com

URL: www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=2670