Main Article Content
In the ongoing trade and investment agreements negotiation between Thailand and the European Union (EU), the EU will likely request that Thailand agree to the use of international investment court (i.e., bilateral investment court) as the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which shall replace arbitration traditionally adopted in most investment treaties. This development conforms with the EU’s position found in its recently negotiated or concluded international agreements, which are Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), EU-Singapore Investment Protection Agreement (EU-Singapore IPA), and EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EU-Vietnam IPA). This article aims to study the origin, characteristics, advantages, and drawbacks of such a new form of ISDS to identify observations and concerns that Thailand should consider in formulating its negotiation position and possibly prepare itself to be part of the system. According to the study, whereas the adoption of bilateral investment court may generate certain benefits, such as eliminating public suspicion about the decision-maker’s impartiality, it may not solve most of the ISDS problems at the center of Thailand’s concerns. In particular, the country shall be responsible for additional regular expenses, apart from other case-related expenses, either as a treaty party or a disputing party. In addition, it is doubtful whether the court would alleviate the problem of adjudicatory inconsistency as currently encountered in arbitration.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The copyright in this website and the material on this website (including without limitation the text, computer code, artwork, photographs, images, music, audio material, video material and audio-visual material on this website) is owned by Chulalongkorn Law Journal and its licensors.
1. Chulalongkorn Law Journal grants to you a worldwide non-exclusive royalty-free revocable license to:
- view this website and the material on this website on a computer or mobile device via a web browser;
- copy and store this website and the material on this website in your web browser cache memory; and
- print pages from this website for your use.
- All articles published by Chulalongkorn Law Journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This permits anyone to copy, redistribute, remix, transmit and adapt the work provided the original work and source is appropriately cited.
2. Chulalongkorn Law Journal does not grant you any other rights in relation to this website or the material on this website. In other words, all other rights are reserved. For the avoidance of doubt, you must not adapt, edit, change, transform, publish, republish, distribute, redistribute, broadcast, rebroadcast or show or play in public this website or the material on this website (in any form or media) without appropriately and conspicuously citing the original work and source or Chulalongkorn Law Journal prior written permission.
3. You may request permission to use the copyright materials on this website by writing to firstname.lastname@example.org.
4. Chulalongkorn Law Journal takes the protection of its copyright very seriously. If Chulalongkorn Law Journal discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, Chulalongkorn Law Journal may bring legal proceedings against you seeking monetary damages and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.
If you become aware of any use of Chulalongkorn Law Journal's copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above or any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to email@example.com.