This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'All documents relating to the Multilateral Investment Court for investment dispute resolution'.




[All redactions made under Art. 4.1(b)]
Ref. Ares(2016)2881256 - 21/06/2016
Ref. Ares(2017)1963547 - 13/04/2017
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Directorate-General for Trade 
Directorate F - WTO, Legal Affairs and Trade in Goods 
Dispute Settlement and Legal Aspects of Trade Policy 
Brussels, 20 June 2016 
DG TRADE/F2/
trade.dga2.f.2(2016)3417863 
NOTE TO THE FILE 
Re: Meeting 
report:  Interactive expert meeting on "Investment-Related Dispute 
Settlement: Towards a comprehensive multilateral approach" organized by 
the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Montreux, 
Switzerland, 23-24 May 2016 

I attended a workshop on possible approaches towards the creation of a multilateral 
investment-dispute settlement mechanism organized by the International Institute for 
Sustainable Development (IISD) in Montreux on 23-24 May 2016. Participants came 
from academia (NYU, Fletcher School, Kent, Amsterdam, Xiamen, Geneva, Freiburg), 
civil society organizations (IISD, South Centre), United Nations (OHCHR, UNECA, 
UNCTAD), as well as from the government of Ecuador. 
Discussions took place under the Chatham House Rule, in form of brainstorming plenary 
and group sessions, with the objective of identifying possible legal and political 
initiatives for establishing a comprehensive multilateral investment–related dispute 
settlement system. The approach proposed by IISD was a broad and inclusive mechanism 
which would not only address investor-State disputes, but also allows individuals, 
communities or associations to join or to submit claims for alleged misbehaviour by 
investors. 
The discussions underlined the legal, technical and political difficulties of such a broad 
approach (questions of the applicable law, links with existing international conventions 
in the fields of human rights, environment or CSR, the administration of the mechanism, 
the scope of standing before the dispute settlement mechanism, etc.) and no operative 
conclusions were drawn.  
Interestingly, the working text proposals put forward by the organizers built to a large 
extent on the EU ICS proposals (in particular regarding qualifications and ethics of 
judges, appeal, transparency, composition of chambers of the court, etc.), which was 
often referred to as an major step forward in the reform of the investment dispute 
resolution system. 
(e-signed) 
(DG TRADE, F2) 
Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111