Background: negotiations over extra costs of repaired road lead to naught

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.

Turkmenistan is awarded most of its costs

Free transfer protection does not entitle investors to free currency conversions

Conduct of state-owned mobile operator cannot be attributed to state absent evidence of specific control over impugned acts

No evidence that removal of right to sell handset had any impact on business, or that impact would be more than

All permits requested by MTS-TM were granted; in any event, claimant fails to prove any loss or detriment from alleged delays or refusals

Claimant and state-owned firm were in different circumstances regarding data needs, thus MTS was not entitled to an equal allocation of data capacity

Claims for historical breaches are dismissed, as tribunal finds insufficient evidence of impact on the operator’s activities

Claimant did not have legitimate expectation of renewal of Agreement

When 2012 Agreement with host state lapsed, investor did not have any right to operate

Agreement between the parties for investor to operate was neither invalid nor illegal

Tribunal clarifies scope and content of the applicable standards of treatment

<em>Prima facie</em>

Turkmentelecom’s conduct is attributable to the state under ILC Articles 4 and 5

State conduct can be both a contractual violation and a treaty breach, and tribunal can uphold jurisdiction over the latter

Applicable rules do not prevent virtual hearing, but Turkmenistan’s threatened default leads to postponement

MTS fails to disqualify opposing counsel, but tribunal insists on ethical wall

Background: Claimant’s operations in Turkmenistan shut down after 2012 settlement agreement expired without renewal

Tribunal directs claimant to bear a portion of Kosovo’s legal costs – but success fee is excluded from the equation

Umbrella clause and FPS claims are also rejected

License revocation was a legitimate exercise of Kosovo’s police powers, meaning that no unlawful expropriation occurred

Revocation of ICKO’s license was not premature, disproportionate, or lacking due process

Kosovo should be held to the FIL’s English version published in its official gazette, meaning that the FIL provides FET protection

Reference to information from security institutions did not play a decisive role in the CBK’s decision to revoke ICKO’s license

CBK acted neither arbitrarily, nor unreasonably by revoking ICKO’s MFI license

Archives