The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the debate on reform of the international investment agreement regime to the fore with renewed force. In this important and timely book, top professionals in the field collectively offer an in-depth investigation of the measures that States have taken, or failed to take, to deal with the pandemic’s consequences and whether these actions or inactions can be construed as investment arbitration risks. In an extensive overview of the impact of COVID-19 on States and investors – including perspectives from UNCTAD, the European Union, the United States, Russia, India, South Korea and the African Union – this comprehensive guide on State defences and investor protection mechanisms tackles such aspects of the debate as the following as affected by the pandemic: treatment of investors in times of pandemic and in the post-pandemic world; sufficient contribution to the economic development of the host State; disparities in bargaining power; and use of ‘pandemic power’ to accord preferential treatment. The final part of the book is dedicated to analysing case studies from around the world in the context of the pandemic and investor-State disputes. Understanding the way public health emergencies can shape international investment law is key to building a sustainable, stable investment environment. As the first detailed study of the post-pandemic development of investment law, this matchless collection takes a giant step toward reconciling the interests of foreign investors and sovereign States at various stages of economic development. With practical recommendations for both States and investors, it will be of immeasurable assistance to practitioners, policymakers, and academics in anticipating and dealing not only with COVID-related measures but also with similar future contingencies.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.