The regulatory taking doctrine in international investment law mandates compensation when state regulations significantly impact investments, even without formal expropriation, balancing sovereign regulation and investor protection.
In Saipem S.p.A. v. Bangladesh, ICSID ruled that judicial interference leading to loss of contractual rights is indirect expropriation. This case broadened protection for foreign investors under international investment law.
Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) treatment ensures foreign investors receive treatment no less favorable than investors from other nations. While promoting non-discrimination, its application in dispute resolution and substantive protections remains debated in investment law.
The place and language of arbitration are crucial in shaping procedural fairness, efficiency, and enforceability. Governed by Sections 20 and 22 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, they ensure party autonomy while allowing tribunals discretion when necessary.
The appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ensures impartiality in arbitration when parties cannot agree on a selection. The Chief Justice plays a pivotal role in ensuring timely, fair, and unbiased tribunal formation.