bilaterals.org logo
bilaterals.org logo

India FTAs & ISDS


Bilateral investment pacts can’t be subject to foreign jurisdictions: FM
India’s Finance Minister P Chidambaram has made it clear that any bilateral investment protection agreement has to be subject to jurisdiction of domestic legal institutions and India will not allow it to be subjected to foreign courts or tribunals.
Multinational firms look for tax shields in bilateral pacts
The aggressive push by India’s tax department to increase revenue has prompted several multinational companies to informally seek the views of lawyers and consultants about invoking bilateral investment promotion and protection agreements to resist the government’s demands for more money.
BIPA talks put on hold
In a significant development, the Government of India has ordered a freeze of all Bilateral Investment Protection Agreements (BIPA) negotiations till a review of the model text of BIPA is carried out and completed. This follows a spate of show cause notices on the Government by foreign companies seeking to recover their investments under the agreement.
Need to align bilateral investment treaty regime with global reality
The changing dynamic of the global economy has led to a transformation in the role of developing countries as both capital importing and exporting States. There is an urgent need to redefine the global BIT regime to reflect this changing paradigm.
Investment protection clause: India can’t do a Maldives without paying a price
Recent disputes, including the GMR-Maldives government row and the clash between foreign telecom firms Telenor, Sistema, Etisalat and Vodafone and the Indian government, have exposed India’s vulnerable position in investment agreements. While the foreign telecom companies can use a potent weapon - the ’investment protection’ clause in bilateral treaties - against India, GMR cannot do the same with Maldives.
Malaysia headquartered Axiata Group threatens Indian government with international arbitration
Malaysia headquartered Axiata Group, which holds about 20% stake in Idea Cellular has threatened claim damages and drag the Indian government to international arbitration under bilateral investment protection pacts (BIPA), making it the sixth international investor in the telecoms space to serve notice under bilateral trade agreements.
Treaties that gave away the store
As India grapples with the Vodafone and 2G fallout, the Bilateral Investment Treaties it signed a few years ago are coming back to haunt it.
India plans to abolish ISD clause in FTAs
India plans to abolish the investor-state dispute system and renegotiate FTAs with South Korea, Singapore, and other countries, an Indian newspaper reported.
India to oppose Vodafone’s move to invoke BIPA pact
The Indian government is likely to oppose any move by Vodafone Plc to invoke the India-Netherlands Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPA) if it is forced to cough up Rs 12,000 crore in taxes on the grounds that the investment was routed through several step down firms based in different countries and that the treaty does not cover tax disputes.
Voda seeks Netherlands treaty to snub govt, will others follow?
Fearing the Indian government will use new tax laws to trap it back around Rs 12,000 crore in taxes, the world’s largest mobile operator, Vodafone, may invoke a bilateral investment treaty between India and the Netherlands to avoid doing so.
2G: Telenor plans to invoke India-Singapore treaty
Norway’s Telenor will seek ’compensation for all investment, guarantees and damages’ if the Indian government fails to sort out issues related to its licence cancellation within the next six months, the company said.
India loses arbitration case against Oz firm
In a stinging indictment of the slow speed with which the higher judiciary decides cases and lackadaisical manner in which the government deals with disputes involving foreign companies doing business in India, a three-member international arbitration panel has decided a case against the Government of India and a PSU.
India may exclude clause on lawsuits from trade pacts
The department of industrial policy and promotion has in principle decided not to include in bilateral trade pacts a clause that permits a foreign investor to sue the host country at an international dispute settlement agency.
Investment terror
Since the 1990s developing nations have been on a treaty spree, signing a vast number of bilateral and regional investment treaties to attract funds for development. But as the figure of investment treaties has shot up so have the claims for damages from investor companies, which are seeking billions of dollars in compensation on account of regulatory laws.
A total lack of transparency
Why responsible companies and governments should avoid the revised ICC Rules in arbitrations involving states.
Protecting investors’ rights: An assessment of EU’s new mandate on international investments
This article tries to provide a first brief assessment of the leaked EU negotiation mandate for an investment protecting agreement in the EU free trade agreements with Canada, India and Singapore.
European Member States refuse necessary reform, ignore the will of the European Parliament and insist that future EU investment agreements copy their bad practices
On Monday 12 September the General Affairs Council approved negotiating mandates for investment protection chapters in free trade agreements with Canada, India and Singapore.
India rejects clause on litigation
Despite a demand by the European Union (EU), India is unlikely to allow a clause in a proposed trade pact with the bloc that permits an overseas investor to sue a host country at an international dispute settlement agency.
Govt speaking in two voices on generic medicines
The Indian government’s doublespeak on generic medicines has the stakeholders in a tizzy.
The UK tight-lipped over dispute with an Indian investor
The United Kingdom has formally declined to release a notice of arbitration delivered by an Indian citizen under the UK-India bilateral investment treaty, explaining that it would likely “prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and an international organisation; UNCITRAL.”