Does Canadian Law Provide Remedies Equivalent to NAFTA Chapter 11 Arbitration?

INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION SERIES PAPER NO. 4 — MAY 2016

DOES CANADIAN LAW PROVIDE REMEDIES EQUIVALENT TO NAFTA CHAPTER 11 ARBITRATION? ARMAND DE MESTRAL AND ROBIN MORGAN

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Does Canadian Law Provide Remedies Equivalent to NAFTA Chapter 11 Arbitration?

Published on May 27, 2016

Centre for International Governance Innovation

It is often alleged that the provisions for investor-state arbitration (ISA) are not needed in international trade agreements to protect the interests of foreign investors in developed democracies because these countries possess well-established judicial systems where justice is given on an impartial basis by impartial judges. It is alleged that if foreign investors were to go to domestic courts, they would find all the remedies they require. To test this hypothesis, this paper looks at the situation in Canada. All 35 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) claims against Canada are considered with a view to determining whether Canadian courts would be empowered to award the same damages that might be awarded by an ad hoc arbitral tribunal, were the claimant to be successful.

Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.

Does Canadian Law Provide Remedies Equivalent to NAFTA Chapter 11 Arbitration? by Centre for International Governance Innovation - Issuu