Guidelines on the Treatment of Foreign Direct Investment
Development Committee of the World Bank Group
31 I.L.M. 1379 (1992)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
During the 1970s, the United Nations took on the task of determining a national standard for how foreign direct investments were to be treated. However, stark disagreement among countries on the issue made the task an impossible pursuit. The World Bank attempted the same feat in 1985, but again experienced insurmountable pushback from the international community. The World Bank tried again in 1991, when Ibrahim Shihata, the vice president and general counsel of the World Bank and the head of the Development Committee, a working group of the World Bank, decided that the World Bank should create guidelines, considered “soft law” or non-binding declaratory rules of conduct, instead of attempting to draft a convention. The Development Committee drafted proposed guidelines, including a provision that set the general standard of compensation for expropriation as “appropriate” and stated that compensation that was “adequate, effective, and paid without undue delay” would generally be considered appropriate. The Development Committee distributed the proposed guidelines to various governments and businesses in order to gather comments. The United States was one of the strongest dissenters to numerous guidelines, particularly the standard for expropriation. The Development Committee eventually revised the guidelines and published the Guidelines on the Treatment of Foreign Direct Investment in 1992 (the Guidelines).
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.