Tribunal validly upheld jurisdiction over second and third construction projects

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.

BIT’s legality requirement does not entail that notion of investment must be defined by reference to domestic law

Settlement Agreement gave rise to a new dispute, thus tribunal had jurisdiction ratione temporis over this claim

Validity of Settlement Agreement that claimant alleges is a BIT-protect investment cannot be reviewed at set-aside stage

BIT is in force, as Turkey validly notified Libya of treaty’s ratification

Background: ICC tribunal upholds jurisdiction under BIT, but declines to hear claims under OIC Agreement and customary international law; Libya files for partial set-aside

Court sees no contradiction between final award and partial award

Adversarial principle does not entail obligation for arbitrators to remedy failure by a party to prove its claims

Tribunal fulfilled its mandate by dismissing insufficiently substantiated request for damages

Lack of explanation for failure to pay costs leads to discontinuance

Claimants are ordered to bear the respondent’s reasonable costs

Respondent did not act in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner

Respondent did not violate the treaty’s full protection and security clause

Dissenter would have found that the military’s seizure of property at the Tazerbo Camp amounted to a CIL breach

Tribunal majority finds that, due to the circumstances prevailing, Libya did not breach its obligation to provide due diligence protection under CIL

CIL claim may be brought by the investor, and not only by the investor’s home state

Libya is responsible for the acts of its military and the GMMRA

Majority finds that claimants only sought protection once (or possibly twice) – Mr. Born disagrees

Obligation to provide full protection and security under customary international law requires due diligence, but circumstances of the host state must be considered

Umbrella clause claims are mostly inadmissible according to abuse of rights doctrine

Arbitration clause also covers claims based on an alleged breach of customary international law

Archives