Advanced systems of domestic corporate law generally apply a “no reflective loss” principle to shareholder claims. Shareholder claims are permitted for direct injury to shareholder rights (such as voting rights). But shareholders generally cannot bring claims for reflective loss incurred as...

International investment agreements (IIAs) almost universally define their temporal validity and thus set conditions for States’ exit from these treaties. This study presents the results of the survey of language that determines the temporal validity of 2,061 bilateral investment agreements...

Many governments have expressed concerns about the uncertainty linked to the perceived inconsistency of treaty interpretation in Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS). An OECD-hosted intergovernmental investment roundtable has been considering a range of tools through which governments can...

The question of expropriation is at the heart of modern foreign investment law, yet remains an area of great uncertainty and ambiguity. Neither treaty law nor existing jurisprudence provides clarity on the questions of when government action amounts to an expropriation or what to do if does.This...

Claims by company shareholders seeking damages from governments for so-called "reflective loss" now make up a substantial part of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) caseload. (Shareholders’ reflective loss is incurred as a result of injury to “their” company, typically a loss in...