Six times Canada had to pay foreign investors under NAFTA’s Chapter 11: Case: Ethyl Corp. (1997) Amount awarded: US$13 million, out-of-court settlement. What happened: The U.S. chemical company challenged a Canada-wide ban on import and trade of the gasoline additive MMT, a suspected neurotoxin. Following a preliminary judgement against Canada, the government repealed the ban, issued an apology and paid a settlement. 2. Case: S.D. Meyers (1998) Amount awarded: CDN$6.05 million, plus interest and compensation. What happened: The U.S. waste disposal firm challenged a temporary Canadian ban on the export of toxic PCB wastes, something the country was obliged to do under an international environmental treaty. The tribunal ruled that Canada violated standards of treatment under NAFTA. 3.Pope and Talbot (1998) Amount awarded: CDN$870,000. What happened: The U.S. lumber company challenged Canada’s lumber export rules implemented under the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber agreement. The tribunal ruled Canada violated NAFTA’s minimum standards of treatment. 4. Mobil Investments/Murphy Oil (2007) Amount awarded: Not yet determined, but damages continue to accrue as long as violating guideline in effect. What happened: The oil investors argued that Canada’s guidelines requiring energy companies to invest in research and development in Newfoundland and Labrador are inconsistent with NAFTA rules. The tribunal ruled in favour of the investors and Canada is liable to pay damages. 5. AbitibiBowater (2009) Amount awarded: CDN$130 million in settlement — the largest NAFTA-related settlement to date. What happened: The pulp and paper company closed its last mill in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2008 and the provincial government enacted legislation to return its timber and water rights to the Crown and expropriate some of its lands and assets associated with water and hydroelectric rights. Abitibi was to be paid fair market value for the assets.The company launched a NAFTA claim and the government decided to settle without going to court. 6. St. Marys (2011) Amount awarded: $15 million. What happened: The company alleges its Canadian subsidiary was the victim of political interference when it tried to open a quarry near Hamilton, Ont., after residents grew concerned about the groundwater. The provincial government issued a zoning order preventing the site from being converted into a quarry and the company claimed that was unfair and discriminatory. The parties reached a settlement in 2013 that saw the company withdraw the claim in exchange for compensation from the Ontario government. Source: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives huffingtonpost.ca/2015/01/14/canada-sued-investor-state-dispute-ccpa_n_6471460.html
Posted on: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 04:07:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015