Costs lie where they fall, but earlier partial award directing Ukraine to reimburse claimant part of the advances on costs remains unaffected

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.

Claimants to be reimbursed 50% of their reasonable costs, but discrepancy with respondent’s costs weighs heavy on assessment of reasonableness

Mexico’s borrowing costs in USD reflects a commercially reasonable rate for pre- and post-award interest

Claimants’ historical tax liability must be subtracted from award’s amount

Tribunal majority cannot value loss of chance to pursue new projects on the basis of forecasts for projects whose demise was unrelated to the treaty breach

Discount rate factors in risk that regulator may refuse to renew the concession, meaning that forecasted term date should account for such renewal

Mere witness allegations that the claimants would have proceeded with a different approach to their operational costs cannot suffice as a basis to estimate cash flows in but-for scenario

Claimants’ strategic choices in entering the Mexican market did not contribute to the eventual demise of the investment

Planned expansion projects failed because of reasons unrelated to Mexico’s treaty breach

Mexico’s conduct can amount to a treaty breach even if there is no denial of justice by Mexican courts in related decisions

Despite several issues and inconsistent rulings, domestic court proceedings do not amount to denial of justice

Regulator’s decision to revoke investors’ operating permit can only be explained by political considerations, in breach of the FET standard

Judicial economy warrants focusing on alleged breaches of FET standard, which can prima facie be reviewed in line with Mexico’s articulation of that standard

Purely intra-USA transactions do not qualify as investment in Mexico

Mexico’s jurisdictional challenge to projected investment is admissible, despite having been raised after Partial Award on bifurcated jurisdictional issues

Proceedings involve several issues around evidence

Background: Claimants’ attempt to secure their own permit to operate Mexican casinos backfires after change in regulator’s direction

Tribunal rejects request for monetary compensation in the absence of specific agreement, but defers ultimate decision on payment modalities to final award

Tribunal splits on the merits of further counterclaims

Tribunal awards over 40 million USD to LIMEX; more damages to be calculated during next phase of the proceedings

Tribunal sees no prohibition against raising counterclaims in ad hoc arbitration agreement

Majority of MML’s residual claims are rejected by full tribunal

Economic imbalance rarely leads to annulment, unless it stems from an illicit act, majority holds

Tribunal majority dismisses other nullity claims, finding no breach of public policy rules

Majority finds no new evidence of corruption

Archives