The Final Decision in Methanex v. United States: Some New Wine in Some New Bottles
On August 3, 2005, the Panel in the NAFTA Chapter 11 case Methanex v. The United States issued its long-awaited ruling, rejecting all of the company's arguments.
On August 3, 2005, the Panel in the NAFTA Chapter 11 case Methanex v. The United States issued its long-awaited ruling, rejecting all of the company's arguments.
High points of the Award include: a crystal-clear statement that non-discriminatory regulations in the public interest (such as environmental laws) will almost never be considered expropriation; some welcome reasoning on national treatment; and precedent-setting explicit reliance on arguments from IISD's amicus brief. Howard Mann, lead author of the IISD brief, offers commentary here.
You might also be interested in
Methanex Corporation vs. The United States of America
A backgrounder on the controversial case under NAFTA's Chapter 11, and on IISD's involvment.
Amicus Curiae post-hearing submission to the NAFTA Chapter 11 Tribunal: Methanex Corp. v. the United States of America
IISD's post-hearing submission in the NAFTA Chapter 11 case Methanex v. the USA argues that the US defence of the California MTBE ban as a public health measure does not go far enough.
Amicus Curiae submissions to the NAFTA Chapter 11 Tribunal: Methanex Corp. v. the United States of America
IISD's submission to the NAFTA Chapter Methanex panel marks the first ever accepted submission to a NAFTA investment tribunal of a "friend of the court."
In the Arbitration under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules between Methanex Corporation, (Claimant/Investor) and United States of America, (Respondent/Party); Petition to the Arbitral Tribunal
The purpose of this Petition is to request permission to submit an Amicus Curiae brief to the Tribunal on critical legal issues of public concern in the arbitration between Methanex Corporation and the United States of America.