Qatar eventually cured initial non-compliance with production order

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.

While state did not act in bad faith or fail to comply with earlier provisional measures order, clarification is in needed to ensure compliance

Qatar did not fail to comply with document production request, but is ordered to conduct a new thorough investigation of responsive documents

Mr. Khan would have heard illegality objection in bifurcated proceeding, but nevertheless concurs with result

Tribunal majority finds that both objections are intertwined with the merits, and declines bifurcation request

Parties agree on test for bifurcation, but disagree on its application to the case

Background: Qatar raises two objections to jurisdiction and asks for bifurcation in bitterly-fought dispute

Tribunal finds disclosure requests to be overly broad and unspecific, and only grants two out of eleven requests

Tribunal decides that it has broad powers to determine disclosure of third-party funder information under 2022 Rules, but only when such disclosure is necessary

Tribunal recommends undertakings proposed by Qatar

Undertakings proposed by Qatar make measures neither necessary nor proportionate

Legal standard for granting provisional measures requires existence of right deserving protection, urgency, necessity, and proportionality

Background: Dispute over criminal proceedings and death sentence leads to request for provisional measures, while Qatar requests further details on third-party funding arrangement

Majority considers that documents evidencing claimant’s business activities are not sufficiently material or specific at this stage of the proceedings

Fundamental documents regarding background of case should be produced in an anticipatory manner

Background: Franco-Algerian businessman seeks to recover assets following his arrest and detention in Qatar

Dissenter considers that excess of powers is manifest

Previous cases and authorities do not support the tribunal’s view, the dissenter holds

Dissenter considers that tribunal ignored jurisdictional requirement under ICSID Convention

No legal basis to make costs order part of the underlying award

Tribunal’s interpretation of designation requirement under ICSID Convention is tenable, as it is supported by other awards and leading academic commentary

Fact that claimant was last to comment on provisional measures request does not amount to breach of right to be heard

Relief granted by tribunal in decision on exclusivity might have been

Tribunal’s decision on exclusivity did not exercise jurisdiction over third parties

No failure to apply the law when issue was not before the tribunal

Archives