Panel Discussion

Are Money Damages for Trade Violations on the Horizon? The Intersection Between Trade & Investment Arbitration

Panel Discussion
July 1, 2009

Location:

Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
1775 I Street, NW
6th Floor
Washington, DC 20006

Presented by the American Bar Association

A distinguished panel will explore the intersection between trade laws and investment treaties, and whether the existing “bright line” limits in this intersection should still stand. The new Mexican Trucks Chapter 11 case follows a long line of cases, including the Lumber cases, Mexican soft drink cases, and the BSE cases, that have sought to blur the line. Is it time for the line to be blurred? Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) provide foreign investment the protection of “fair and equitable treatment in accordance with international law,” among others. Investor-State dispute resolution usually is a private actor vs. state arbitration proceeding under the auspices of various arbitral bodies, such as ICSID, with money damages available. Might a claim seeking damages over allegedly WTO-inconsistent application of antidumping and countervailing duty laws be successful when challenged in the context of a BIT?

Moderators:

• Ken Pierce, Hughes Hubbard & Reed
• Mélida Hodgson, Foley Hoag
  

Panel:

• Salvador Behar, International Trade Legal Counsel, Embassy of Mexico
• Theodore R. Posner, Crowell & Moring
• John M. Townsend, Hughes Hubbard & Reed
• Prof. Todd J. Weiler, naftaclaims.com/investmentclaims.com

 
This program is brought to you by the following American Bar Association Committees:
International Trade
International Investment & Development
International Arbitration
Mexico