Expert Advice When You Need It Most

I have a really interesting question about international business law relating to compensation for destroyed investments

Asked over 2 years ago - San Diego, CA

Tanzania and Great Britain have, as between many other countries, an agreement which can be mediated in Washington whereby British investments can be compensated if destroyed in Tz and vice versa. In this particular case Tanzania provided for a piece of land to be developed into which 6 figures or more were privately invested and, through devious means, the resources diverted and the ownership of the investor dissolved with the help of the armed forces who broke through and erased the boundaries of a piece of land. It was probably for geopolitical reasons. The investor would rather have the land or a good part of it returned and funds lost reimbursed to reinvest there, so as to fulfill a pledge to those who hold a stake in the heritage value of that piece of land. What are....

Additional information
What are the chances that Great Britain and or the USA (to whom Tz is considered 'best friend' in Africa (however corrupt the country is), can support the case and enable an independent business initiative to be restored to that investment and piece of land? Who could help better understand this scenario?

Flag

Save

Share with:

Attorney answers (3)

Chintan Vijay Panchal

Reputation Level 6

Answered over 2 years ago. International Law Attorney in New York, NY.

Flag

You appear to be referencing the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) entered into between the United Republic of Tanzania and the UK. Depending upon who the international investors are (i.e. their nationalities), one or more of them may have private rights under the BIT, which provides for protection against expropriation. These investors may be able to bring a private action against Tanzania directly. Such an action would be brought before the International Centre for the Settlement of International Disputes (ICSID). It is important to note that a validly rendered decision of an ICSID Tribunal is binding and enforceable against the defendant country. In this way, BITs are a powerful tool for investors and one of the only ways individuals can directly sue nation-states.

Mark as good answer

2 people marked this answer as good

Add comment

David Rashid Sweis

Reputation Level 8

Answered about 2 years ago. International Law Attorney in Oak Brook, IL.

Flag

The answer to your question is very much a question of British law and an issue arises as to whether there exists a bilateral investment treaty with Tanzania and Britain. In the U.S. some of its bilateral investment treaties call for the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). You may verify with the appropriate governmental ministry if such an option exists. Otherwise, consult the world bank's website as well as the United Nations website for text to determine if British nationals are afforded such a method for resolving investment disputes.

Mark as good answer

1 person marked this answer as good

Add comment

Pamela Koslyn

Reputation Level 20

Answered over 2 years ago. Business Attorney in Los Angeles, CA.

Flag

Very interesting. To increase your chances of someone providing a substantive answer to this, you may want to re-post it under International Law and under D.C. instead of CA business.

Disclaimer: Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on, since each state has different laws, each situation is fact specific, and it is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Mark as good answer

2 people marked this answer as good

Add comment