Order on costs is rectified based on parties’ advance payments

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.

Omission of reference to compound interest in dispositive part of award can be remedied through rectification

Cost of debt in Peru is reflected by standard US bond rate plus Peru’s country risk premium at the date of the Award

Tribunal confirms previous reasoning on reference date for interest, opining that substantive revisions do not fall within scope of rectification proceedings

CB&I withdraws ICSID claim against Colombia

Mere inability to honor adverse costs award does not meet test for security for costs

CB&I requests stay of ICSID case after ICC award is issued in parallel case

Action reveals that ICC tribunal ordered disclosure of third-party funder

Tribunals strikes from the record information that was submitted belatedly

No need to disclose terms of funding agreement

Absent special circumstances, parties have no duty to disclose information on other entities or individuals connected with the third-party funder

Claimants are awarded roughly 5 million USD in costs

Interest is calculated at cost of Peru’s debt at date of the Award

Tribunal awards 110.7 million USD for the SFR Service Claim, as calculated by the claimants, rejecting Peru’s criticism of operating costs assumptions, indirect damages, and discount rate based on Kallpa’s WACC

Claimants’ sale of the subsidiary after the dispute arose is irrelevant to quantum analysis

New Methodology for Secondary Lines was not discriminatory

Claimants failed to prove that the New Methodology for Secondary Lines was arbitrary

In denying permanent dispatch to claimants’ subsidiary, Resolution 141 was seriously arbitrary and thus in violation of MST/FET standard

Tribunal finds that Bid Terms implicitly guaranteed dispatch of the selected Firm Base Provider, without violating Economic Dispatch Principle

FPS provision referring to “police protection” is limited to physical safety

MST/FET standard prohibits state conduct that is seriously arbitrary or discriminatory and protects legitimate expectations, but it does not impose a duty to provide a stable and predictable legal environment

MST/FET standard has evolved since Neer, but treaty still imposes a “high threshold”

General assumption is that treaty claims are not transferred with the sale of an investment; Kenon Holdings has standing to bring its claim

Tribunal must examine jurisdictional/admissibility objection regardless of its belated submission

Argument that Kenon Holdings lost the right to bring claims when selling its investments pertains to admissibility, but distinction between jurisdiction and admissibility does not have any impact on the decision in this case

Archives