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’s “reservations” about claimant’s case on damages are obiter dicta

No fundamental rule of procedure protecting a claimant’s right to investigate corruption

No failure to state reasons, despite punctual lack of clarity, when dismissing claim of denial of justice

While tribunal could have further engaged with allegations of corruption, this is not a reviewable issue

Tribunal failed to answer question it set out to review, leaving the inquiry open – and resulting in a contradiction and failure to state reasons

By failing to review implementation of CMC Order, tribunal manifestly exceeded its powers

Committee clarifies applicable standards for the relevant annulment grounds

Background: Tribunal dismisses on the merits claims related to issues beyond its jurisdiction

Costs for in-house counsel is justified as they participated in the hearing

Valuation of sold shares should be adjusted to date of breach with reference to cost of equity

No tax gross-up; interest should be risk-free rate

No regulatory risk discount, but the tribunal greenlights illiquidity and minority stake discounts

Investor was entitled to choose between FiTs and market premium option, and this choice should be honoured in valuation exercise

Valuation date is date of the breach

Duty to compensate under international law exists regardless of current profitability of the investment

No need to decide moot matters

Full tribunal finds that eventual overhaul of regulatory framework breached Article 10(1) ECT

For tribunal majority, early reforms were not marginal in nature, as they impacted elements of the incentives regime on which the claimant had relied when investing

Due diligence was sufficient, especially as project’s lenders conducted their own due diligence

Spain conveyed to CSP investors that regulatory regime would be stable, while future reforms would rely on consultations and consensus, and eschew radical changes

Applicable regime contained guarantee of stability and grandfathering of existing installations, as Spain recognised that stability was key to investors

Date of investment is date when financial commitment became irreversible

FET standard provides for balance of costs and benefits

Specific commitments made directly to the investor are not necessary for legitimate expectations to arise, as long as state gives specific assurances or representations to a particular group of investors

Archives