Three summits last week—G-7, NATO, and U.S.-EU—launched a wide range of transatlantic initiatives to coordinate policy, particularly on trade, technology, and defense. These new formats and dialogues can ensure a much deeper level of regulatory cooperation between the United States and Europe by exchanging perspectives, briefing materials, and in some cases, staff. For companies on both sides of the Atlantic, these emerging policy trends also open up new opportunities to engage decision-makers both in Washington and European capitals.
Continue Reading Transatlantic Summits: Main Takeaways for Tech and Defense
Marney Cheek
Marney Cheek has advised companies, non-governmental organizations, and governments on high-stakes international disputes and legal strategy for more than 20 years.
Marney serves as both counsel and advocate before numerous international arbitral tribunals and courts, including the International Court of Justice, U.S. federal court, and major arbitral institutions such as the AAA, ICSID, PCA, and SIAC. She represents clients in complex international commercial disputes, having successfully defended a client in a $1.8 billion claim filed by a collaboration partner. Marney serves as both counsel and arbitrator in numerous investment treaty arbitrations. She is an expert on public international law and currently represents the Government of Ukraine in its landmark cases before the International Court of Justice adverse to the Russian Federation, including Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation).
In addition to leading complex disputes, Marney routinely advises clients on public international law matters and issues arising under numerous multilateral treaties. Her pro bono work includes representation of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and she serves on the Steering Committee of Covington’s Wimmer Initiative, a pro bono program that focuses on protecting and advancing media freedom. She also is at the forefront of business and human rights disputes, having represented global labor unions in the first binding arbitration brought under a business and human rights compact, the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety.
Drawing upon her experience as Associate General Counsel at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Marney also routinely counsels clients on international trade matters and is a member of the roster of arbitrators for several U.S. free trade agreements.
Marney is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and serves as a Vice President of the American Society of International Law. She is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Robert H. Jackson Center. She has previously taught investment law at Columbia University School of Law. She is recognized as an “extraordinarily thoughtful” and “creative” lawyer with a “wealth of knowledge” on international law matters in Chambers and Legal 500.
USTR Finds China’s IP Practices Cause at Least $50 Billion in Harm: Proposed Tariffs and Investment Restrictions Ratchet Up U.S.-China Trade Tensions
March 22, 2018
Earlier today, the administration announced its findings that China’s theft of U.S. technologies and intellectual property (“IP”) have caused at least $50 billion in harm to the U.S. economy per year. In response, President Trump issued an order announcing its intent to impose additional tariffs on Chinese…
Continue Reading USTR Finds China’s IP Practices Cause at Least $50 Billion in Harm: Proposed Tariffs and Investment Restrictions Ratchet Up U.S.-China Trade Tensions
Next Up: Section 301: Companies and Global Markets Should Prepare for the Risk of Rising U.S.-China Trade Tensions
Following the recent U.S. announcement of tariffs on steel and aluminum imports under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the United States is now poised to implement trade sanctions against China stemming from an investigation of that country’s intellectual property (“IP”) practices. Such sanctions, which could include…
Continue Reading Next Up: Section 301: Companies and Global Markets Should Prepare for the Risk of Rising U.S.-China Trade Tensions
Re-Opening NAFTA: Consequences for U.S. Businesses
President-elect Donald Trump made trade policy a key issue in his campaign and has declared his interest in either withdrawing from or renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Government officials from Mexico and Canada have publicly stated that their respective governments are open to renegotiating the treaty. As…
Continue Reading Re-Opening NAFTA: Consequences for U.S. Businesses
What’s New in the TPP’s Intellectual Property Chapter
Note: This post is the third in a series of posts on the final text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) by Covington’s International and Public Policy lawyers. The final TPP text, which was released on November 5, 2015, is available here. TPP is not expected to enter into force …
Continue Reading What’s New in the TPP’s Intellectual Property Chapter
The Trans-Pacific Partnership Investment Chapter: Maintaining Important Protections for U.S. Investors Overseas
Note: This post is the second in a series of posts on the final text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) by Covington’s International and Public Policy lawyers. The final TPP text, which was released on November 5, 2015, is available here. TPP is not expected to enter into force …
Continue Reading The Trans-Pacific Partnership Investment Chapter: Maintaining Important Protections for U.S. Investors Overseas
India’s Investment Treaties – Will the Government Reject a Core Standard of Investment Protection?
Almost all of the more than 3,000 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in existence offer foreign investors the protection of “fair and equitable treatment” under international law. India’s new draft model BIT does not. In place of the well-established standard of protection, which has been interpreted and applied in hundreds of …
Continue Reading India’s Investment Treaties – Will the Government Reject a Core Standard of Investment Protection?
Congress: Don’t dismiss neutral dispute settlement for US investors
Recent calls by anti-trade groups to abandon investor-state arbitration (often referred to as “investor-state dispute settlement,” or ISDS) ignore the modern reality of the global economy and conjure images of Chicken Little’s warnings that the sky is falling. Investment flows exceeded $1.45 trillion globally in 2013. Of the billions of…
Continue Reading Congress: Don’t dismiss neutral dispute settlement for US investors
A Critical Opportunity to Promote Gold Standard Investment Protections
The United States and the European Union are currently negotiating a comprehensive, high standard trade agreement. Launched in 2013, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) seeks to unlock economic growth by further opening the US and EU markets, addressing regulatory barriers that result in significant costs to companies operating…
Continue Reading A Critical Opportunity to Promote Gold Standard Investment Protections
Why A U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty Matters
This post originally appeared on Investment Policy Central.
A U.S.-China bilateral investment treaty (BIT) will serve as the cornerstone for the bilateral economic relationship between these two economic powerhouses for years to come. It puts in place important rules that protect U.S. investors against discrimination and arbitrary treatment, with…
Continue Reading Why A U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty Matters