A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA

Gloria Maria Alvarez, Blazej Blasikiewicz, Tabe Van Hoolwerff, Mary Mitsi, Kleopatra Koutouzi, Nikos Lavranos, Emma Spiteri-Gonzi, Adrian Videgaray , Piotr Willinski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

79 Downloads (Pure)


This article analyses the validity of some of the most often-heard criticism against ISDS. It concludes that most of that criticism is neither supported by statistical evidence nor by the practice of international arbitration law. Consequently, this article cautions against the current hyper-activism to reform or even to dismantle some of the salient features of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and instead, calls for a rational and balanced debate based on facts with a view to improving the ISDS system where necessary in an orderly fashion.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-36
Number of pages36
JournalJournal of International Arbitration
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2016


  • ISDS
  • Investor-State arbitration
  • European Union Law
  • European Commission
  • international arbitration
  • international investment law
  • dispute settlement
  • energy law


Dive into the research topics of 'A Response to the Criticism against ISDS by EFILA'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this