 |
| 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
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Awards and Decisions: 2005 |
Displaying 1 to 25 of 49 |
 |
| 1. |
Repsol YPF Ecuador SA v Empresa Estatal Petróleos del Ecuador (Petroecuador), Procedural order no 1, ICSID Case No ARB/01/10;
IIC 199 (2005), signed 22 December 2005  (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Annulment – Performance bond – Stay of enforcement
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the Committee should have stayed the enforcement of the arbitral Award pending the Decision on Annulment.
2. Whether Petroecuador was obliged to post a bond for the total amount of the award to obtain the stay.
|
| 2. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Decision on Request for Production of Documents, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 126
(2005), signed 17 November 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Confidentiality and privilege – Privilege
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the tribunal should uphold Glamis Gold's request for documents held by the United States which were being withheld
on the grounds of privilege.
2. What the correct applicable law was that the tribunal should apply when considering the issue of privilege.
|
| 3. |
Bayindir Insaat Turizm Ticaret ve Sanayi A Ş v Pakistan, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/03/29; IIC 27 (2005), signed 14 November 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Preliminary proceedings – Waiting period—negotiations – Conduct of proceedings – Stay of proceedings – Claims – Contract claims – Treaty claim – Investment – Investment ‘in accordance with host state law’ – Investment defined in treaties – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Standard of review – Standards of treatment – Most-favoured-nation, jurisdictional matters – Parallel proceedings
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the Claimant had made an investment.
2. Whether the Claimant's treaty claims qualified as contract claims.
3. Whether the Claimant's treaty claims were sufficiently substantiated for the Tribunal to uphold jurisdiction.
|
| 4. |
Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija SA and Vivendi Universal SA v Argentina, Decision on jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/97/3;
IIC 72 (2005), signed 14 November 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Parallel proceedings – Res judicata – Investor – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Standard of review – Subject matter of the dispute (and jurisdiction)
Core issue(s): What the proper role of a second Tribunal was in determining the jurisdiction of a dispute that had already been decided by
an original Tribunal and an ad hoc Annulment Committee.
|
| 5. |
France Télécom Mobiles International SA and FTML SAL v Lebanon, Swiss Challenge No 1, 4P.98.2005/svc, IIC 283 (2005), signed 10 November 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards
|
| 6. |
France Télécom Mobiles International SA and FTML SAL v Lebanon, Swiss Challenge No 2, 4P.9154.2005/svc, IIC 284 (2005), signed 10 November 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards
|
| 7. |
Loewen v United States, Memorandum opinion, Civil Action No 04-2151 (RWR); IIC 257 (2005), signed 31 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Judicial review of arbitral awards
Core issue(s): Whether under the United States Federal Arbitration Act, the three-month time limit for serving notice of a motion to vacate
an arbitral award starts running from the date of a tribunal's award or the date of its supplemental decision (where such
decision is issued).
|
| 8. |
Aguas del Tunari SA v Bolivia, Decision on Respondent's Objections to Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/02/3, IIC 8 (2005), signed 21 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Evidence – Admissibility – Attribution – Investor
|
| 9. |
Wena Hotels Ltd v Egypt, Decision on the Application by Wena Hotels Ltd For Interpretation of the Award, ICSID Case No ARB/98/4;
IIC 275 (2005), signed 20 October 2005 despatched 31 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Interpretation of award – Expropriation – Expropriation of contract rights – Investment
Core issue(s): 1. What constituted a ‘dispute’ as to the meaning and scope of an award under Article 50 of the ICSID Convention.
2. What was the meaning of ‘expropriation’ as used by the Tribunal in the underlying Award and what was the effect of the ruling
that Wena's rights had been expropriated.
|
| 10. |
AIG Capital Partners Inc and CJSC Tema Real Estate Company Ltd v Kazakhstan, Enforcement decision, (2005) EWHC 2239 (Comm);
IIC 9 (2005), signed 20 October 2005 despatched 20 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Enforcement – Enforcement in domestic courts
Core issue(s): Whether funds of the national oil reserve of Kazakhstan held via Kazakh central bank accounts were ‘property of a State's
central bank’ for the purposes of the State Immunity Act 1978 and immune from measures of execution in the English courts.
|
| 11. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Procedural Order No 6, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 124 (2005), signed 15 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Procedural orders
Core issue(s): Whether the Tribunal should amend the arbitration timetable to allow the amicus to make written submissions after the filing
of the Parties' memorials and to reflect the disputing Parties' views that more time would be required for submissions.
|
| 12. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Procedural Order No 7, Ad hoc–UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 125 (2005), signed 10 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Procedural orders
Core issue(s): Whether the tribunal should amend the arbitration timetable to allow the United States further time to prepare and file its
rejoinder.
|
| 13. |
Noble Ventures Inc v Romania, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/01/11; IIC 179 (2005), signed 05 October 2005 despatched 12 October 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Attribution – Ultra Vires conduct, functional test – Ultra Vires conduct, government function – Ultra Vires conduct, state organs/state-owned enterprise – Ultra Vires conduct, structural test – Claims – Contract claims – Treaty claim – Umbrella clause – Standards of treatment – Abuse of process – Abuse of rights – Arbitrariness – Arbitrary (unreasonable) & discriminatory treatment standard – Fair and equitable treatment standard – Full protection and security – Good faith – Legitimate expectations – Expropriation – Indirect expropriation – Treaties, interpretation – Effectiveness, principle of – Object & purpose (treaty interpretation and) – Ordinary meaning (treaty interpretation and) – Rules of treaty interpretation – Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties – Remedies and costs
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the umbrella clause contained in the US–Romania BIT transformed breaches of a contract between the host state and
the investor into breaches of the treaty.
2. Under which circumstances the conduct of state–owned entities was attributable to the host state for the purpose of establishing
its liability under a bilateral investment treaty.
3. Whether contracts concluded by state entities on behalf of the host state were attributable to the host state for the purpose
of establishing the state's liability by virtue of an umbrella clause contained in a bilateral investment treaty.
|
| 14. |
Bogdanov and ors v Moldova, Award, Ad hoc—SCC Arbitration Rules; IIC 33 (2005); Stockholm International Arbitration Review
(SIAR), No 2006:3, signed 22 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Evidence – Adverse inference – Conduct of proceedings – Investment – Investment defined in treaties – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Consent to jurisdiction through treaties – Standards of treatment – Fair and equitable treatment standard – Full protection and security – Expropriation – Indirect expropriation – Remedies and costs – Damages
Core issue(s): 1. Whether Bogdanov's claims were covered by, and hence whether the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce
Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) had the requisite competence under, the Russia-Moldova BIT.
2. Whether the Tribunal could apply principles of iura novit curia and procedural default because Moldova did not respond or
appear in the proceedings in the arbitration.
3. Whether Moldova violated the fair and equitable treatment standard contained in the Russia-Moldova BIT by failing to compensate
the investor for the value of assets transferred to the state under an investment contract in a manner that defeated the investor's
legitimate expectations to obtain reasonable consideration for the transferred assets.
|
| 15. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Procedural Order No 5, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 123 (2005), signed 19 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Procedural orders
Core issue(s): Whether the tribunal should extend the period of time allowed for the parties to submit their objections to requests for documents.
|
| 16. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Decision on Application and Submission by Quechan Indian Nation, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration
Rules; IIC 122 (2005), signed 16 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings
Core issue(s): Whether the tribunal should accept an amicus curiae brief from a non–disputing party.
|
| 17. |
Occidental Exploration and Production Company v Ecuador, Judgment, [2005] EWCA Civ 1116, IIC 203 (2005), signed 09 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Judicial review of arbitral awards
|
| 18. |
CMS Gas Transmission Company v Argentina, Application for Annulment and Request for Stay of Enforcement of Arbitral Award,
ICSID Case No ARB/01/8, IIC 66 (2005), signed 08 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards
|
| 19. |
Canfor Corporation v United States, and joined cases involving Tembec Inc and ors and Terminal Forest Products Ltd, Order
of the Consolidation Tribunal, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 349 (2005), signed 07 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Parallel proceedings – Consolidation of claims
|
| 20. |
Plama Consortium Limited v Bulgaria, Order, ICSID Case No ARB/03/24, IIC 190 (2005), signed 06 September 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Interim measures
Core issue(s): Whether interim measures of protection to stop parallel court proceedings may be issued.
|
| 21. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Procedural Order No 4, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 121 (2005), signed 26 August 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Evidence – Production of documents – Conduct of proceedings
Core issue(s): Whether the tribunal should extend the period of time allowed for the parties to submit their objections to requests for documents.
|
| 22. |
Eureko BV v Poland, Partial Award and Dissenting Opinion, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 98 (2005), signed 19 August 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Standards of treatment – Expropriation
|
| 23. |
Methanex Corporation v United States, Final Award on Jurisdiction and Merits, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 167 (2005), signed 03 August 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Arbitral rules & institutions – UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules – Specialized treaty frameworks – NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) – Arbitrators – Challenge to appointment of arbitrator – Replacement of arbitrator – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Subject matter of the dispute (and jurisdiction) – Standards of treatment – Fair and equitable treatment standard – International minimum standard – National treatment – Expropriation
Core issue(s): 1. Whether a sufficient legal relationship existed between Methanex and the Californian measures under Article 1101 of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (‘NAFTA’), and therefore, whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case.
2. Whether Californian measures regarding MTBE were aimed at protecting domestic industries rather than protecting public health
and environment and if so, whether the United States had violated its obligations under Articles 1102—National Treatment—by
not according foreign methanol producers the same treatment as domestic ethanol producers ‘in like circumstances’; 1105—Minimum
Standard of Treatment—by issuing measures intended to discriminate against foreign investors and investments; or 1110 of the
NAFTA—Expropriation—by taking a ‘measure tantamount to expropriation’ by diverting a market to domestic ethanol producers.
|
| 24. |
Glamis Gold Ltd v United States, Decision on Objections to Document Production, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; IIC 120
(2005), signed 20 July 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Evidence – Production of documents
Core issue(s): What factors should the tribunal take into account when considering whether it should order specific disclosure being sought
by the Claimant.
|
| 25. |
CDC Group plc v Seychelles, Annulment Decision, ICSID Case No ARB/02/14, IIC 48 (2005), signed 29 June 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Review of arbitral awards – Annulment
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Sign Up for
Alerts |
|
| Receive free
updates on Investment Claims by
email or RSS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
