MFN clause was deemed irrelevant at the jurisdictional stage

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.

Ongoing negotiations with local company and uncertainty of damages were not found to be a bar to jurisdiction

Adopting broad understanding of “investment”, tribunal held that Continental could bring claims based on treatment related to its local subsidiary

Despite the general character of the contested emergency measures, the tribunal considered that the dispute had arisen “directly” out of the investment

Tribunal considered that dispute was “legal” in nature

Tribunal deemed that the claims were prima facie withing the scope of its jurisdiction

Background: Measures introduced by Argentina in the aftermath of the 2001 financial crisis prompted claimant to initiate ICSID arbitration

Objective elements to an investment must be present even when parties agreed in contract to submit their dispute to ICSID arbitration

Parties agree to share costs

Tribunal majority decides that lack of compensation does not amount to violation of the MST

Tribunal finds that high threshold for MST violation is not met

Customary international law minimum standard of treatment has not evolved so far that it can be equated with autonomous FET protections

No substantial deprivation occurred since investment comprises both the Original Permits and the River Permit

Tribunal deems that establishing expropriation requires a substantial deprivation

River permit rights are protected investments under NAFTA Article 1139

No need to decide if USMCA is relevant to NAFTA’s interpretation

Canada’s request to strike certain documents from the record is upheld

Tribunal determines that it has the power to draw adverse inferences from failure to produce documents and witnesses

Background: Dispute over revocation of mining rights around the St. Lawrence River leads to NAFTA claim

Dutch government says treaty continues to apply and tribunal has jurisdiction

EC argued that EC treaties supersede BIT protections

Slovak Republic raises objections to tribunal’s jurisdiction

Background to Eureko’s claims

Archives

MFN clause was deemed irrelevant at the jurisdictional stage

Ongoing negotiations with local company and uncertainty of damages were not found to be a bar to jurisdiction

Adopting broad understanding of “investment”, tribunal held that Continental could bring claims based on treatment related to its local subsidiary

Despite the general character of the contested emergency measures, the tribunal considered that the dispute had arisen “directly” out of the investment

Tribunal considered that dispute was “legal” in nature

Tribunal deemed that the claims were prima facie withing the scope of its jurisdiction

Background: Measures introduced by Argentina in the aftermath of the 2001 financial crisis prompted claimant to initiate ICSID arbitration

Objective elements to an investment must be present even when parties agreed in contract to submit their dispute to ICSID arbitration

Parties agree to share costs

Tribunal majority decides that lack of compensation does not amount to violation of the MST

Tribunal finds that high threshold for MST violation is not met

Customary international law minimum standard of treatment has not evolved so far that it can be equated with autonomous FET protections

No substantial deprivation occurred since investment comprises both the Original Permits and the River Permit

Tribunal deems that establishing expropriation requires a substantial deprivation

River permit rights are protected investments under NAFTA Article 1139

No need to decide if USMCA is relevant to NAFTA’s interpretation

Canada’s request to strike certain documents from the record is upheld

Canada’s request to strike certain documents from the record is upheld

Tribunal determines that it has the power to draw adverse inferences from failure to produce documents and witnesses

Background: Dispute over revocation of mining rights around the St. Lawrence River leads to NAFTA claim

Dutch government says treaty continues to apply and tribunal has jurisdiction

EC argued that EC treaties supersede BIT protections

Slovak Republic raises objections to tribunal’s jurisdiction

Background to Eureko’s claims

Email Alerts

Editor’s Picks

User Login:

Email Alerts

Editor’s Picks