Tribunal de la CNUDMI declina jurisdicción ya que TBI entre Francia y Mauricio no se aplica a inversor con doble nacionalidad
DAWOOD RAWAT V. THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS, PCA CASE 2016-20
DAWOOD RAWAT V. THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS, PCA CASE 2016-20
NOVENERGIA II – ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT (SCA) (GRAN DUCADO DE LUXEMBURGO), SICAR VS. EL REINO DE ESPAÑA, CASO DE LA CCE NO. 063/2015
UAB E ENERĢIJA V. REPÚBLICA DE LETONIA, CASO DEL CIADI NO. ARB/12/33
Koch Minerals Sárl y Koch Nitrogen International Sárl v. La República Bolivariana de Venezuela, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/11/19
Bear Creek Mining Corporation vs. República de Perú, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/14/21
Caratube International Oil Company LLP y Devincci Salah Hourani vs. la República de Kazakstán, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/13/13
China ha mantenido fuertes flujos de inversión extranjera directa dentro y fuera del país y ha expandido su red de tratados de inversiones. Este artículo destaca la creciente aparición de China en los casos de ISDS en esta última década, tanto como Estado de origen como anfitrión.
Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands B.V. c. el Reino de España, Caso de la CCE Nro. V2013/153
Teinver S.A., Transportes de Cercanías S.A. y Autobuses Urbanos del Sur S.A. vs. La República Argentina, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/09/1
WNC Factoring Limited vs. La República Checa, Caso de la CPA No. 2014-34
Burlington Resources Inc. vs. la República de Ecuador, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/08/5
Eli Lilly and Company vs. el Gobierno de Canadá, CNUDMI, Caso del CIADI No. UNCT/14/2
Anglia Auto Accessories Ltd. vs. La República Checa (Caso de la CCE No. V 2014/181) e Ivan Peter Busta and James Peter Busta vs. La República Checa (Caso de la CCE No. V 2015/014)
Ampal-American Israel Corp. y otros vs. la República Árabe de Egipto, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/12/11
Victor Pey Casado y la Fundación Presidente Allende vs. La República de Chile, Caso del CIADI No. ARB/98/2
ICSID tribunal dismisses claims brought against Indonesia based on forged mining licences Churchill Mining PLC and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and ICSID Case No. ARB/12/40 Inaê Siqueira de Oliveira [*] After rendering separate decisions on jurisdiction¾one for the case brought by British company Churchill Mining PLC under the United […]
Windstream Energy LLC v. Government of Canada, PCA Case No. 2013-22 An arbitral tribunal under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has reached the award stage. Although dismissing the discrimination and indirect expropriation claims, the tribunal upheld the claim of failure to provide fair and equitable treatment (FET), and ordered Canada […]
Peter A. Allard v. The Government of Barbados, PCA Case No. 2012-06 On June 27, 2016, a tribunal under the auspices of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) dismissed all claims by Canadian businessman Peter A. Allard against Barbados under the Canada–Barbados bilateral investment treaty (BIT) and the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission […]
The Government of India has proposed a Joint Interpretative Statement to its bilateral investment treaty (BIT) partners. The statement clarifies key substantive and procedural provisions, bringing them more in line with India’s new foreign investment policy.
(English) Venezuela to Pay Us$1 Billion For Expropriating Canadian Mining Company’s Investment
ICSID Tribunal dismisses MFN Clause in WTO GATS as a means of importing Senegal’s consent to arbitration from third party BIT
PCA tribunal deemed acts of Polish Agricultural Property Agency not attributable to Poland
Claimant not considered Investor due to interpretation of “Seat” under Cyprus–Montenegro BIT
Ecuador’s Levy on extraordinary oil profits at a 99% rate has breached Murphy’s legitimate expectations, decides PCA tribunal
Ecuador ordered by PCA tribunal to pay $24 million to Canadian Mining Company
(English) Copper Mesa Mining Corporation v. Republic of Ecuador, PCA No. 2012-2 – Matthew Levine
(English) The long-expected final award has been rendered in the high-profile case initiated by tobacco giant Philip Morris in early 2010 against Uruguay over its tobacco control measures.
(English) Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7
Philip Morris Asia Limited v. The Commonwealth of Australia, PCA Case No. 2012-12
(English) A tribunal at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) declared that it lacked jurisdiction in the case of Corona Materials LLC (a U.S. company) against the Dominican Republic.
(English) In a 273-page award dated April 4, 2016, a tribunal at the Additional Facility (AF) of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) ordered Venezuela to pay US$1.202 billion plus interest to Canadian company Crystallex International Corporation (Crystallex).
(English) Tenaris S.A. and Talta-Trading e Marketing Sociedade Unipessoal LDA v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/26
(English) In a 318-page award issued July 28, 2015 but only published February 2016, a tribunal at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) ordered Zimbabwe to return farms it seized without compensation in 2005.
(English) On January 6, 2016, TransCanada initiated arbitration against the United States for “unreasonably delaying approval” of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline and ultimately denying, in November 2015, the company’s application for the required Presidential Permit.
(English) Adel A. Hamadi Al Tamimi v. Sultanate of Oman, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/33
(English) Quiborax S.A. and Non-Metallic Minerals S.A. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia (ICSID Case No. ARB/06/2)
(English) State Enterprise “Energorynok” (Ukraine) v. The Republic of Moldova, SCC Arbitration V (2012/175)
(English) Since the signing of the first Agreement on Cooperation and Facilitation of Investments (ACFI) by Brazil, in March 2015, English translations of the document and analyses of its innovative aspects have been published. The hidden question is: to what extent do Brazil’s ACFIs innovate in the regulation of foreign investments?
(English) Venoklim Holding B.V. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/22
(English) Mamidoil Jetoil Greek Petroleum Products Societe S.A. v. The Republic of Albania, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/24
(English) Khan Resources Inc., Khan Resources B.V. and CAUC Holding Company Ltd. v. The Government of Mongolia and MonAtom LLC, PCA Case No. 2011-09
Brazil and Mozambique signed on March 30, 2015 the first Cooperation and Investment Facilitation Agreement (CIFA) based on Brazil’s new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT). The second was signed on April 1, 2015 between Brazil and Angola. Unlike traditional BITs, which are geared towards investor protection, the CIFAs focus primarily on cooperation and investment facilitation. […]
US$1.76 billion dollar award levied against Ecuador in dispute with Occidental; tribunal split over damages Occidental Petroleum Corporation and Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. The Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/11 Damon Vis-Dunbar The Republic of Ecuador has been ordered to pay US$1,769,625,000 billion in damages—the largest award to be handed down […]
Majority declines jurisdiction in claim against Argentina over domestic litigation requirement Daimler Financial Services AG v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/1 Damon Vis-Dunbar A claim against Argentina by a subsidiary of the German automotive firm Daimler A.G. has failed on its merits because the claimant did not first bring the dispute to court in […]
Australia to reject investor-state dispute resolution in TPPA The Australian government will not sign on to investor-state dispute resolution provisions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), according to an Australian government official. “We have made it clear that we will no longer be seeking investor-state dispute settlement provisions in trade agreements,” said the Australian Minister […]
In November 2011, an arbitral tribunal found the Republic of India guilty of violating the India-Australia bilateral investment treaty (BIT). It is the first known investment-treaty ruling against India, despite the fact that the country has a mammoth portfolio of BITs with more than 70 countries. News of the award broke only in February 2012.[i] […]
Philip Morris files for arbitration over intellectual property dispute with Australia The tobacco company Philip Morris filed for arbitration on 21 November 2011, claiming the government of Australia’s regulations on cigarette branding breach the Hong Kong-Australia bilateral investment treaty. The announcement arrived on the same day that the Australian Parliament passed legislation that bans most […]
Mass claim in Argentine bond dispute is granted ICSID jurisdiction Abaclat and Others (Case formerly known as Giovanna A Beccara and Others) and The Argentine Republic, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, ICSID Case No. Arb/07/5 Damon Vis-Dunbar An ICSID tribunal has accepted jurisdiction to hear a claim by tens of thousands of Italians who claim […]
One of the more politically controversial aspects of international investment protection treaties is the liability of a State when political sub-divisions are found to have breached that State’s treaty obligations to foreign investors. This issue is particularly significant in federal States, such as Canada, the United States, Australia or Germany, among others, where sub-national governments […]
For nearly two decades, the tobacco industry has used international investment rules to challenge governmentrestrictions on cigarette marketing. In 1994, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company threatened to bring a claim under the North American Free Trade Agreement’s (NAFTA) investment chapter as part of its successful lobbying campaign against Canada’s proposed “plain packaging” legislation, which would have […]
UK firm victorious in dispute with Russia, but damages much less than claimed RosInvestCo UK Ltd. v. The Russian Federation, SCC Case No. Arb. V079/2005 Lise Johnson In an award dated 12 September 2010, the tribunal in RosInvestCo v. Russian Federation issued an award in which it found that the Russian Federation had unlawfully expropriated […]
Georgia loses dispute with Greek and Israeli oil investors Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Ron Fuchs v. The Republic of Georgia (ICSID Case Nos. ARB/05/18 and ARB/07/15) Martin D. Brauch Two oil traders have been awarded more than US$45 million each in damages from the Republic of Georgia in an ICSID award that advances a broad interpretation […]
It is no longer a secret that there is a new wave of foreign investment in farmland, predominantly in Africa. An explosion of media reports and a series of studies by the World Bank, Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), have confirmed the scale and consequences of this new influx of foreign investment. The World Bank report, by far the most comprehensive, found that reported deals amounted to 45 million hectares in 2009 alone.
Argentina on the hook for breach of Fair and Equitable Treatment Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A., and Vivendi Universal v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19) Lise Johnson On 30 July 2010, the ICSID tribunal in Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A., and Vivendi Universal v. Argentina issued a decision […]
By Fernando Cabrera Diaz May 11, 2010 Tobacco giant Philip Morris International (PMI) has initiated an ICSID arbitration against Uruguay over new rules requiring that 80% of cigarette pack surfaces be devoted to graphic warnings of the dangers associated with smoking. The company alleges that the labeling requirements and recent tax increase harm its investments […]