The Philip Morris v. Uruguay case reaffirmed states' rights to regulate in the public interest, particularly for health measures. The ICSID tribunal ruled that Uruguay's tobacco regulations did not constitute expropriation or unfair treatment, setting a key precedent.

The Siemens v. Argentina case reaffirmed investor protections under BITs, ruling Argentina’s termination of Siemens’ contract as unlawful expropriation. The ICSID tribunal awarded Siemens over $217 million, reinforcing fair treatment and state obligations in investment disputes.

The SD Myers v. Canada case set key precedents in NAFTA arbitration, clarifying national treatment, minimum standard of treatment, and damages in non-expropriation cases. The Tribunal found Canada's PCB export ban discriminatory, awarding SDMI CAN$6 million in compensation.

International Commercial Arbitration (ICA) and International Investment Arbitration (IIA) differ in scope, legal frameworks, and policy concerns. ICA resolves private disputes, while IIA involves state sovereignty, public interest, and investment treaty obligations.

Metalclad v. Mexico highlights indirect expropriation under NAFTA, where regulatory actions deprived an investor of economic use. The tribunal ruled in favor of Metalclad, awarding $16.5M, but a Canadian court partially annulled the decision, limiting its scope.

The Tecmed v. Mexico case (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/2) established that politically motivated regulatory actions can constitute expropriation. The tribunal ruled that Mexico’s refusal to renew a landfill permit violated investor protections, awarding $5.5M in damages.

Globalization has transformed investment law, shaping foreign direct investment (FDI) flows, regulatory frameworks, and investor protections. Bilateral treaties, dispute mechanisms, and economic integration reflect the evolving legal landscape of cross-border investments.

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) provides a neutral forum for resolving disputes between states and foreign investors. Established in 1966 under the ICSID Convention, it ensures impartial arbitration and conciliation, fostering investment stability.

International investment law shapes economic policies in developing nations by attracting FDI while restricting regulatory sovereignty. While it fosters growth, it raises concerns over investor-state disputes, financial burdens, and environmental sustainability.

The Model India BIT (2016) redefines India’s investment treaty framework, balancing investor protection with state sovereignty. It introduces clear investment definitions, excludes MFN clauses, limits ISDS, and prioritizes regulatory autonomy, addressing earlier flaws.

International investment law governs foreign investments, balancing investor rights with state regulatory powers. It involves IIAs, arbitration mechanisms, and standards like fair treatment and non-discrimination, while addressing public policy and sovereignty challenges.