![Global rules on foreign direct investment](https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/-/media/images/nrf/nrfweb/knowledge/publications/us_24355_legal-update--fdi-alert.jpeg?w=265&revision=a5124a65-abf9-40e4-8e96-9df39ffdb212&revision=5250068427347387904&hash=96B456347C3246E5649838DF281C5F5D)
Publication
Global rules on foreign direct investment (FDI)
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
United States | Publication | March 2021
On February 4, 2021, a state court of appeals panel held in Alvarez v. Altamed Health Services Corp. that an arbitration agreement's appellate arbitral review provision was substantively unconscionable because it favored the employer. While the provision in question provided that either party could seek appellate review of an initial arbitration award by a second arbitrator, in practice, only the employer was likely do so, thus "unilaterally adding costs and time to the arbitration proceeding by seeking this review and thereby maximizing the employer's status as the better resourced party."
However, the court held the appellate arbitral review provision severable as the employee failed to establish any other instance of substantive unconscionability. The court rejected the employee's arguments that the employer's failure to provide a Spanish translation of the arbitration agreement (where the employee preferred, but did not require, the translation) and failure to attach the AAA rules (absent a challenge to a specific AAA rule) were substantively unconscionable. Consequently, the court held the arbitration agreement to be enforceable, reversing the trial court's order. So, in addition to providing guidance on appellate arbitral review provisions, this is a nice case to keep in your back pocket when an employee throws everything but the kitchen sink in opposition to your motion to compel arbitration.
Publication
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
Publication
On February 2, 2024, the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the European Union confirmed that the Committee of Permanent Representatives had signed the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Regulation, referred to as the AI Act. Approval by the EU Parliament followed on 13 March 2024, and the AI Act is likely to appear in the EU’s Official Journal around May 2024. The AI Act aims to establish a stringent legal framework governing the development, marketing, and utilisation of artificial intelligence within the region, thereby marking a significant advancement in the regulation of this burgeoning domain.
Publication
The EU’s Artificial Intelligence Regulation, commonly referred to as the AI Act, is expected to come into force during the summer of 2024 (the AI Act). The AI Act will be the first comprehensive legal framework for the use and development of artificial intelligence (AI), and is intended to ensure that AI systems developed and used in the EU are safe, transparent, traceable, non-discriminatory and environmentally friendly.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023