Abuse of process claim found to be worthy of bifurcation

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.

Questions relating to change in nationality of claimant are bifurcated

Objections concerning timing of nationality and contested acts found to be partially worthy of bifurcation

Questions of existence of investment do not warrant bifurcation

Tribunal identifies test for bifurcation under 2022 ICSID Arbitration Rules – preliminary objections must be “serious and substantial” on a prima facie basis

Background: Bahrain asks for bifurcation in dispute over purported investments made by claimant by depositing funds in bank accounts

Court sees no violation of the principle of unity of the state that could give rise to a breach of French international public policy

CNIM’s arguments regarding the conduct of the environmental regulator pertain to the merits and are not reviewable

Background: ICC tribunal finds that Bahrain rightly cancelled contracts for the construction of a waste-to-energy plant, and awards costs to the state

Appointing Authority appoints state’s appointee

Claimants are awarded most of their costs

Tribunal awards pre- and post-award interest at the rate of the 5-year US treasury bond

Claim for moral damages is dismissed as unsupported by evidence

Tribunal declines to set off monies owed by claimants to Future Bank – but claimants’ request for a declaration that no set-offs can be made against the damages awarded is equally rejected

Tribunal considers that asset-based valuation method minimizes the risk of compensating claimants for their violations of applicable regulations

Proceeds collected from the liquidation of Future Bank to be deducted from damages owed under the award to avoid double recovery

No need for satisfaction when alternative remedies have already been granted

Politically-motivated expropriation was not taken for a public purpose, and thus unlawful

Forced administration and liquidation of Future Bank was politically motivated, and thus not a bona fide regulatory measure

Bona fide regulatory measures do not amount to an unlawful expropriation, especially in the highly-regulated banking sector

Deprivation of the claimants’ shareholding has become permanent

Absent an express treaty provision and outside the context of a claim for denial of justice, no requirement to exhaust local remedies exists

Alleged conduct is not sufficiently connected to the claims

Circumstantial evidence shows a deficient anti-money laundering system, a practice of wire stripping, and the use of an alternate messaging system that suggest a larger scale of violations – yet these are deemed to be insufficient to declare the claims inadmissible

Tribunal sees no violation of international sanctions of a sufficient gravity to entail inadmissibility of the claims

Archives