 |
| Subscriber Login: |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tell us about an award |
| Know of a new award? Tell
us about it. |
|
|
|
| You are here:
Home > Awards & Decisions by Date
|
Awards and Decisions listed by Date
Awards and decisions are listed in reverse chronological order (from the current year, through to pre-2000).
Click on a year to view a list of awards and decisions from that year.
To display an award or decision, click on the linked title.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Number of search results per page 10 | 25 | 50 | 75
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Awards and Decisions: 2006 |
Displaying 1 to 10 of 56 |
 |
| 1. |
Eureko BV v Poland, Judgment on Challenge to Arbitrator, RG 2005/14005/A, IIC 100 (2006), signed 22 December 2006  (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Arbitrators
|
| 2. |
Eureko BV v Poland, Judgment on Setting Aside of Award, RG 2005/1542/A, IIC 99 (2006), signed 23 November 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards
|
| 3. |
Pey Casado and Président Allende Foundation v Chile, Procedural Order No 14, ICSID Case No ARB/98/2; IIC 188 (2006), signed 22 November 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Arbitral rules & institutions – Arbitrators – Appointment of arbitrator – Challenge to appointment of arbitrator – Confidentiality and privilege – Confidentiality – Privilege – Conduct of proceedings – Hearings – Memorials – Procedural orders – Claims – Treaty claim – Standards of treatment – Administrative irregularity – Due process
Core issue(s): Whether due process and procedural equality could justify the parties commenting on internal work documents used by arbitrators
for internal deliberations.
|
| 4. |
Mitchell v Congo, the Democratic Republic of the, Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Award, ICSID Case No ARB/99/7;
IIC 172 (2006), signed 27 October 2006 despatched 01 November 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Annulment (ICSID) – Grounds for annulment – Failure to apply applicable law – Failure to state reasons – Manifest excess of power – Investment – Investment defined in treaties – Investment defined in tribunal practice – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Treaties, interpretation
Core issue(s): 1. Whether an ad hoc Committee had the power under Article 52(1)(e) of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes
Between States and Nationals of Other States (18 March 1965) 575 UNTS 159, entered into force 14 October 1966 (‘ICSID Convention’)
to reassess the Tribunal's reasoning in the Award.
2. Whether, in order to qualify as an investment within the meaning of the ICSID Convention and the applicable BIT, an operation
should contribute to the economic development or at least the interests of the host state.
|
| 5. |
Champion Trading Company and Ameritrade International Inc v Egypt, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/02/9; IIC 57 (2006), signed 27 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Attribution – Standards of treatment – Fair and equitable treatment standard – National treatment, in like circumstances (or likeness) – Non-discrimination – Transparency – Remedies and costs – Costs and expenses
Core issue(s): 1. Whether certain actions of Egypt after the liberalization of the cotton industry in Egypt in 1994 including measures affecting
the National Cotton Company which harmed the investment of Champion Trading Company and Ameritrade International Inc amounted
to a breach of the national treatment provision in the Treaty between the United States and Egypt Concerning the Reciprocal
Encouragement and Protection of Investments (‘US/Egypt BIT’).
2. To what extent Egypt's actions were a breach of the transparency principle which formed a part of the minimum standard of
treatment provision in the US/Egypt BIT.
|
| 6. |
Zeevi Holdings v Bulgaria and The Privatization Agency of Bulgaria, Final award, UNCITRAL Case No UNC 39/DK; IIC 360 (2006), signed 25 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Arbitral rules & institutions – UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules – Evidence – Burden of proof – Claims – Contract claims – Counterclaims – Remedies and costs – Costs and expenses – Damages – Interest
|
| 7. |
Pey Casado and Président Allende Foundation v Chile, Procedural Order No 13, ICSID Case No ARB/98/2; IIC 187 (2006), signed 24 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Arbitral rules & institutions – Arbitrators – Appointment of arbitrator – Challenge to appointment of arbitrator – Confidentiality and privilege – Confidentiality – Privilege – Conduct of proceedings – Hearings – Memorials – Procedural orders – Claims – Due process – Treaty claim – Standards of treatment – Administrative irregularity – Procedural equality
Core issue(s): Whether the Arbitral Tribunal could circulate documents reflecting the Tribunal's thoughts on the merits of the case, when
a member of the Tribunal had already communicated it to one party in breach of his obligation of confidentiality.
|
| 8. |
Helnan International Hotels A/S v Egypt, Decision of the Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/05/19; IIC
130 (2006), signed 17 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Attribution – State entities and attribution – Claims – Treaty claim – Investment – Investment defined in tribunal practice – Investment defined in treaties – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Parties to the dispute (and jurisdiction) – Relevant date (and jurisdiction) – Subject matter of the dispute (and jurisdiction) – Time limitations (and jurisdiction)
Core issue(s): 1. Whether Helnan’s claims fell beyond the temporal scope of the Egypt/Denmark BIT.
2. Whether there was a dispute arising directly out of an investment.
3. Whether the acts complained of were attributable to Egypt.
|
| 9. |
Tanmiah v Tunisia, Court Decision (Summary), Arab Investment Court 1/1 Q, IIC 238 (2006), signed 12 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Applicable law – Attribution – Investment – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals
|
| 10. |
LG&E Energy Corp and ors v Argentina, Decision on Liability, ICSID Case No ARB 02/1; IIC 152 (2006); (2007) 46 ILM 36, signed 03 October 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Applicable law – Relationship of international law & host state law – Claims – Umbrella clause – Standards of treatment – Arbitrary (unreasonable) & discriminatory treatment standard – Fair and equitable treatment standard – Legitimate expectations – Expropriation – Indirect expropriation – Investment-backed expectations (expropriation and) – Police powers (expropriation and) – Regulatory expropriation (or regulatory taking) – Treaties, interpretation – Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
Core issue(s): Whether Argentina could rely on the ‘state of necessity’ defence to be exempted from liability for breaches of the Argentina/US
BIT that resulted from measures adopted during its economic and financial crisis.
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Sign Up for
Alerts |
|
| Receive free
updates on Investment Claims by
email or RSS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
