Investment facilitation provisions are incorporated in many international investment agreements (IIAs). Especially, because investment facilitation measures have their root in international trade law and investment law and national law, disputes concerning these measures could be settled through methods in these different legal regimes. Notably, such disputes could be submitted to investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) or WTO dispute settlement, or both, by different types of disputants and relying on different treaties or laws. This makes settlement of investment facilitation disputes a complicated issue. This chapter presents a structural review of the issue of settlement of investment facilitation disputes, including dispute prevention, settlement of investment facilitation disputes through ISDS, and WTO dispute settlement, and explores the issue of parallel jurisdiction over investment facilitation disputes.

Chapter 2 discusses the concept and the main characteristics of admissibility in general international law and in international investment law. It offers a potential mechanism to address some of the consequences of substantive overlaps between treaty and contract claims. The chapter also advances criteria that investment tribunals could consider to assess the admissibility of shareholder indirect claims under IIAs.