The Eminent Conflict Between the WTO DSB and the Proposed International Investment Court to Deal with Investment Disputes

  • Luciana Maria de Oliveira Sá PiresEmail author
  • Vivian Daniele Rocha Gabriel


Despite an environment of economic and political crisis and the fragmentation of trade and investment rules through the creation of several preferential trade agreements, the DSB has survived through the years as a stable and technical organism with extensive case law. However, the new investment-sensitive issues have required a more complete and consistent regulation through international trade and investment rules. As a consequence, bilateral investment agreements and the recently created mega-agreements, such as the CPTTP, the EU-Canada CETA, and the project of TTIP, established new investment parameters and dispute settlement mechanisms to deal with investment disputes. The chapter investigates the evolution of the regulation on investments in the multilateral, bilateral, and regional sectors, as well as the position of Brazil and the possibility of conflict between the WTO Dispute Settlement System and the new dispute settlement mechanisms on investments created by the bilateral and regional agreements.



The authors would like to thank Michelle Ratton Sanchez Baddin and Cristiane Lucena Carneiro for their very useful comments and feedback regarding an earlier version of this chapter.


  1. Appellate Body Report, Argentina – Footwear (EC), 2000Google Scholar
  2. Appellate Body Report, Brazil – Desiccated Coconut, 1887Google Scholar
  3. Araújo N, Souza Júnior LG (1998) Os acordos bilaterais de investimento com a participação do brasil e o direito interno—análise das questões jurídicas. In: Casella PB, de Azevedo Mercadante A (Coord) Guerra comercial ou integração mundial pelo comércio: a OMC e o Brasil. LTR, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  4. Brasil. Decreto n° 313, 30 de julho de 1948. The original official version is available at: Ministério das Relações Exteriores Website:
  5. Brasil. Ministério do desenvolvimento indústria e comércio. Available at:
  6. Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2008) 3rd edn. Cambridge University, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Costa JAF (2010) Direito Internacional do Investimento Estrangeiro. Juruá, CuritibaGoogle Scholar
  8. Cozendey CMB, Cavalcante PM (2015) Novas Perspectivas para Acordos Internacionais de Investimentos—o Acordo de Cooperação e Facilitação de Investimentos (ACFI). Cadernos de Política Exterior, Brasília, pp 87–109Google Scholar
  9. Crawford J (2012) Brownlie’s principles of public international law, 18th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. European Commission (2015) Concept Paper. Investment in TTIP and beyond – the path for reform: enhancing the right to regulate and moving from current ad hoc arbitration towards an Investment CourtGoogle Scholar
  11. Gabriel VDR (2015) A proteção jurídica dos investimentos brasileiros no exterior. Dissertação (Mestrado em Direito), Universidade de São PauloGoogle Scholar
  12. Gabriel V (2016) The new Brazilian cooperation and facilitation investment agreement: an analysis of the conflict resolution mechanism in light of the theory of the shadow of the law. Conflict Resolut Q 34Google Scholar
  13. Hodgson M (2015) The trans-pacific partnership investment chapter sets a new worldwide standard. Columbia FDI Perspectives. Perspectives on topical foreign direct investment issues. n. 160Google Scholar
  14. Hufbauer GC (2016) Investor-state dispute settlement. Assessing the trans-pacific partnership volume 1: market access and sectoral issues. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, pp 109–119Google Scholar
  15. Koeth W (2016) Can the Investment Court System (ICS) save TTIP and CETA? EIPA European Institute of Public Administration Institut européen d’administration publique. Working paperGoogle Scholar
  16. Office of the United States Trade Representative (2016) Overview of the Trans Pacific PartnershipGoogle Scholar
  17. Rocha AR (1964) Parecer DAJ/138: criação de órgão de arbitragem internacional—BIRDGoogle Scholar
  18. Schill SW (2014) Ordering paradigms in international investment law: bilateralism-multilateralism-multilateralization. In: Douglas Z et al (eds) The foundation of international investment law: bringing theory into practice. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Schill SW (2016) The European Commission’s proposal of an “investment court system” for TTIP: stepping stone or stumbling block for multilateralizing international investment law? Am Soc Int Law. 20(9)Google Scholar
  20. Shaffer G (1999) The WTO Shrimp-Turtle Case (United States Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products). Am J Int Law 93:507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Thorstensen V (2001) OMC Organização Mundial do Comércio: As regras do comércio internacional e a nova rodada de negociações multilaterais. Aduaneiras, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  22. Titi C (2016) International investment law and the protection of foreign investment in Brazil. In: Torterola I, Smith Q (eds) Transnational Dispute Management 2, Special Issue on Latin America, vol 1Google Scholar
  23. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2010) Investor-state disputes: prevention and alternatives to arbitration. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Van den Bossche P, Werner Z (2014) The law and policy of the World Trade Organization, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  25. Viñuales JE, Langer MJ (2010) Foreign investment in Latin-America: between love and hatred. In: Auroi C (ed) Latin-America: dreams and legacyGoogle Scholar
  26. World Trade Organization (2016) Participation in dispute settlement proceedings: 9.3 Amicus Curiae submissionsGoogle Scholar
  27. World Trade Organization. The results of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations: the legal texts. The documents are also available on the WTO Website:

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luciana Maria de Oliveira Sá Pires
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vivian Daniele Rocha Gabriel
    • 2
  1. 1.University of São Paulo Law SchoolSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Faculty of LawUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations