Claimant is awarded over 10 million USD in costs, with tribunal stressing that uncovering fraud requires resources

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 finds that fraudulent conduct is “very serious” and relates to subject-matter of the arbitration, concluding that claims are inadmissible

Fraudulently obtained funds were moved through a series of offshore companies, in operations that “bear the hallmarks” of a money laundering scheme

Grand Express made misrepresentations and sent forged documents to the EDB, tribunal finds

Tribunal finds that entities linked to the claimant defrauded OVZ

Conduct of three individuals can be attributed to the claimant; non-appearance of witness called for cross-examination gives rise to adverse inferences

Tribunal sees no reason to apply heightened standard of proof to illegality allegations

Post-investment illegalities may render claims inadmissible, based on a series of different theories

Legality requirement contained in definition of ‘investment’ only applies to establishment of investment

Belarus’ ratione materiae/illegality objection is not untimely and, in any event, the tribunal would have examined it ex officio

Legality requirement contained in definition of ‘investor’ only applies to establishment of investment

Tribunal has jurisdiction over Grand Express’ receivables, which were never assigned to the EDB

Tribunal applies principle of non-retroactivity of treaties to dismiss some claims

Claimant could validly invoke ICSID AF Rules

Tribunal addresses request for provisional measures and authorizes additional claim

Background: Termination of railcar manufacturing joint-venture leads to treaty claim

Other inclusions from Indian model are less clear

Tribunal authorised to order security for costs against investors

Belarus agrees to five-year ‘exhaustion of local remedies’ requirement

Background: the claimant brings treaty claims against Belarus following the failure of a large urban development project

New Turkey-Belarus BIT innovates in several respects

Belarus is ordered to bear majority of costs

Tribunal adds compound interest to the compensation

Arbitrators grant 20 million USD in compensation for the loss of the Facilities, but decline to award lost profit

Tribunal splits on standard for judicial expropriations, but ultimately finds that the Cassation Decision does not amount to an expropriation

Archives