Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter 11: Past, Present, and Future
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I. INTRODUCTION This Article explains the background of the North American Free Trade Agreement (1) (NAFTA) by centering on its dispute resolution provisions and outline the provisions of Chapter 11 of NAFTA (Chapter 11), perhaps the most innovative and certainly the most controversial part of the entire agreement. (2) On its effective date of January 1, 1994, (3) NAFTA created the world's largest international free trade zone. (4) The phase-out of trade barriers has produced dramatic increases in trade between the NAFTA parties: the United States of America (United States), the Government of Canada (Canada), and the United Mexican States (Mexico), collectively the signatory states. (5) However, as one might expect, the increase in trade has also increased disputes related to trade and to the provisions of NAFTA itself. (6) To understand Chapter 11 and the controversy surrounding its arbitral decisions, namely their perceived attack on sovereignty and their perceived requirement of confidentiality, this Article provides an overview of the published Chapter 11 cases and a critical analysis of these cases. Additionally, this Article reviews the Notes of Interpretation of Certain Chapter 11 Provisions (Notes of Interpretation) adopted by the NAFTA Free Trade Commission (7) on July 31, 2001. (8) Finally, this Article examines current proposals and prospects for changing the application of Chapter 11 by discussing the impact of NAFTA on future trade negotiations and international treaties, especially the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) (9) II. BACKGROUND OF NAFTA A. NAFTA Generally A thorough discussion of NAFTA is beyond the scope of this Article. Briefly, NAFTA is a cooperative economic intergovernmental organization (IGO) designed to eliminate trade barriers without establishing an external tariff in common among the three member states. (10) It is one of many IGOs creating a free trade area. (11) NAFTA began as the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) (12) Shortly thereafter, the United States initiated discussions with Mexico to create a U.S.-Mexico trade agreement. (13) Canada joined the process, and the negotiations yielded NAFTA (14) Although CFTA was a model for NAFTA, NAFTA addresses additional issues. (15) NAFTA's purposes include: eliminating trade barriers, promoting fair competition, increasing investment opportunities, providing protection for intellectual property rights, creating procedures for implementing and enforcing NAFTA, and establishing a forum for further enhancement and expansion of the benefits provided by NAFTA. (16) B. Dispute Resolution Under NAFTA NAFTA establishes three new dispute resolution mechanisms: NAFTA Chapter 20 (Chapter 20) applies to disputes between signatory states; (17) NAFTA Chapter 19 (Chapter 19) applies to disputes between the signatory states relating to investigations of anti-dumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) investigations; (18) and Chapter 11 applies to disputes between signatory states and investors from another signatory state (foreign investors). (19) Although NAFTA does not create a private right of action, (20) it encourages alternative dispute resolution methods and the study of the methods' effectiveness to resolve private international disputes. (21) 1. Disputes Under NAFTA Chapter 20 Chapter 20 provides a mechanism for resolving disputes concerning the interpretation and application of NAFTA and alleged violations of NAFTA by signatory states. (22) The Free Trade Commission is charged with resolving disputes under Chapter 20. (23) Disputing signatory states are first required to seek resolution through cooperation and consultation. (24) Should this fail, a five-member arbitral panel may ultimately resolve the dispute. (25) After reviewing the dispute, the arbitral panel shall issue a report recommending a solution. (26) The disputing signatory states are free to implement the solution. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».