Costs are split

You are not logged in. If you are a subscriber, please Login to access. If you are not a subscriber, you can contact us for a rate quote at subscribe@iareporter.com. Alternatively, you can sign up to receive free email headlines here.

Tribunal cannot import broader non-impairment protection through TPA’s MFN clause

In any event, the tribunal sees no nationality-based discrimination

Colombia’s decision to organize a new tender does not qualify as “treatment” that could breach NT or MFN standards

Tribunal rejects FET claim, seeing no arbitrariness, discrimination, or breach of due process in Colombia’s decision to hold a new tender instead of prolonging the 2009 Concession

FET standard tethered to customary law requires high standard of proof

Tribunal finds that Neustar remains a party to the arbitration, despite the purported assignment of the claim to Security Services/Vercara

Under international law, transfer of pending ICSID claim requires respondent’s consent – which was not given in this case

Colombia fails to prove that transfer of claim is contrary to Delaware law

Tribunal finds that during the proceedings, there was a purported assignment of the arbitration claim, rather than a change of claimant’s name

Claims are not purely contractual in nature, since Ministry acted in public capacity when deciding not to renew the concession

Tribunal sees no abuse of process in alleged premature submission of dispute to arbitration, nor in sale of investment after the arbitration was lodged

Standing must be assessed at date when arbitration was filed, and Neustar owned and control COI when the case was filed and registered

Arbitrators find that a dispute had crystallized at the time when the request for arbitration was filed

Tribunal finds that parallel litigation waiver is met, warning against “excessive formalism”

Notice of dispute was neither premature nor defective

Neustar only sought provisional measures before Colombian administrative courts, thus the TPA’s fork-in-the-road provision was not triggered

After arbitration is lodged, claimant’s local affiliate wins new tender and is sold to GoDaddy; Neustar and Security Services conclude Unit Purchase Agreement addressing ICSID claim

Background: Spat over renewal of Internet domain concession leads to ICSID claim

Legal costs for Rule 41 proceedings lie where they fall; allocation of arbitration costs is reserved

Tribunal majority rules that FET claim manifestly falls under FTA’s tax carve-out, since default interest qualifies as ‘taxation measure’

Tribunal majority finds that expropriation claim is manifestly without legal merit since claimants did not have an FTA-protected investment that could be subject to expropriation

NT and FET claims do not manifestly fall within FTA’s financial services carve-out

Tribunal rejects argument that claimant’s parallel litigation waivers are manifestly without legal validity

Standard under 2022 Rule 41 is high, similar to that of 2006 Rule 41(5)

Archives