样式: 排序: IF: - GO 导出 标记为已读
-
Does an Annulled Award Constitute Legal Authority in Investment Arbitration? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2024-01-13 Albert Jan van den Berg
Arbitration lawyers have been discussing enforcement of annulled awards for some 25 years. Recently, another discussion regarding annulled awards is gaining traction: can an investment arbitrator rely on an annulled award? More specifically, does it constitute legal authority? The author submits that, in investment arbitration, an arbitral award, annulled by a national court in the UNCITRAL Rules context
-
The Compatibility of the Substance over Form Doctrine with Tax and Investment Treaties: A Case Study of Lone Star v the Republic of Korea ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2024-01-06 Błażej Kuźniacki
In late August 2022, the Lone Star tribunal concluded one of the latest awards in tax-related investment treaty disputes (the tax-related claims account for almost USD 1.5 billion of the total of almost USD 4.7 billion claimed in compensation). It also is the first award in which the tribunal dealt with the application of the substance over form doctrine (SOFD) by tax authorities and courts of the
-
Impartiality and the Construction of Trust in Investor-State Dispute Settlement ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-12-05 Stavros Brekoulakis, Anna Howard
This article analyses impartiality in investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) by identifying the way that the parties’ trust in arbitrators is constructed. Drawing on the findings of a large-scale empirical project, it questions the applicability of an orthodox judicial doctrine of impartiality to ISDS on the grounds that trust in arbitrators is constructed on a fundamentally different basis from
-
Counterclaims in Investment Arbitration: Towards an Integrated Approach ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-06-26 Mees Brenninkmeijer, Fabien Gélinas
It is widely accepted that counterclaims may not be used as a means to exceed the limits of a tribunal’s jurisdiction, while they must at the same time be closely connected to the other party’s claim. However, in the particular context of investment arbitration, these two propositions create a tension that has led to a problematic and unfair construction of the investor-State dispute settlement mechanism
-
Shareholder Claims for Reflective Loss in Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Proposing Reform Options for States ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-05-15 Anuki Suraweera
The rule against reflective loss claims by shareholders is a fundamental tenet of corporations law, accepted across numerous domestic law jurisdictions and under customary international law. Yet bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have long broken from this conventional approach by allowing shareholders to bring claims for their indirect loss. UNCITRAL Working Group III has identified that this anomalous
-
For a Universal Standard for Conflicts Disclosures ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-05-11 Alexis Mourre
Amongst the many reforms of international arbitration that are currently discussed, the adoption of a universal standard for conflicts disclosures is particularly necessary. Currently, the subjective standard “in the eyes of the parties” that is adopted by the IBA Guidelines and the ICC Rules coexist with the objective standard “from the perspective of a fair-minded and informed observer”, as defined
-
Invoking the Paris Agreement in Investor-State Arbitration ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-04-25 Arman Sarvarian
In recent years, there has been mounting interest in the possibility of the Paris Agreement 2015 featuring in investor-State arbitration.2 This applies particularly to investments connected to greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, insured emissions and other financial investments to be made under the internationally supervised emission-offsetting mechanism to be activated in accordance with the Glasgow
-
Recent Trends in Investment Arbitration on the Right to Regulate, Environment, Health and Corporate Social Responsibility: Too Much or Too Little? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-03-08 Crina Baltag FCIArb, Riddhi Joshi, Kabir Duggal
The article addresses the recent trends in investment arbitration, focusing on the evolution of international investment agreements from the perspective of the right of the States to regulate in public interest, as well as of the provisions concerning environment, health, and corporate social responsibility. These issues have been chosen because they highlight areas where the tension between sovereign
-
Justifying the Protection of Legitimate Expectations in International Investment Law: Legal Certainty and Arbitrary Conduct ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2023-01-27 Caroline Henckels
This article argues that legal certainty provides the most compelling justification for recognizing legitimate expectations in international investment law, and that the prohibition on arbitrary conduct provides the most persuasive reason for their protection. After considering other rationales for recognizing legitimate expectations, the article analyses the types of government action typically arising
-
Vanishing Treaty Claims: Investors Trapped in a Temporal Twilight Zone ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-10-06 Raphael Ren
The recent surge of arbitral awards forging new paths in the less-explored frontier of jurisdiction ratione temporis is laudable. Yet, if left unchecked, the trajectory of jurisdictional barriers expanding in depth and difficulty threatens to shrink the road of arbitration to the eye of a needle. Two emerging rules are especially worrisome: first, the right to claim under BITs vests exclusively with
-
Investment Protection in Post-Brexit EU–UK Relations ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-08-05 Laura Peters, Sebastian Wuschka
With the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU, in particular from its internal market, the customs union and all of the EU’s international agreements, a new chapter in Europe’s legal, economic and political history has begun. This note sets out the consequences of Brexit for investment protection and arbitration, focusing on EU-UK investment relations. In a first step, it addresses the EU-UK Trade
-
The ILC Articles on State Responsibility: More than a ‘Plank in a Shipwreck’? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-04-28 James Crawford,Freya Baetens
-
Conciliation and Mediation in Investor-State Dispute Settlement Provisions: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-04-04 Romesh Weeramantry,Brian Chang,Joel Sherard-Chow
Abstract The article sets out the results of an extensive review of conciliation and/or mediation in investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions contained in international investment agreements (IIAs). Out of 3815 IIAs that were initially screened, 2674 (ie 70 per cent) do not refer to such provisions. The research also revealed that while the number of IIAs signed each year with investor-State
-
ICSID: An Introduction to the Convention and Centre ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-04-02 Roberto Castro de Figueiredo
-
Can International Investment Law Punish Investor’s Human Rights Violations? Copper Mesa, Contributory Fault and its Alternatives ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-29 Peter Muchlinski
Abstract Copper Mesa v Ecuador was the first award to assess the contribution of the investor’s human rights violations to the loss of their investment caused by the termination of its mining concession by the Respondent State. It found that the investor’s conduct acted as a contributory fault reducing the amount of compensation payable by the Respondent. It is argued that the contributory fault approach
-
State Responsibility and Corruption in the Context of Investor-State Disputes ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-23 Natalie L Reid,Romain Zamour
-
The 2001 ILC Articles on State Responsibility—An Annotated Bibliography ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-18 Kiran Nasir Gore,Dr Gloria M Alvarez
Abstract In this Special Issue, commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, as adopted in August 2001 (‘ILC Articles’ or ‘ARSIWA’), we curate a bibliography annotating important contributions to scholarship and literature concerning the ILC Articles. It is organized topically, including
-
Concluding Remarks: ARSIWA - a Reference Text Partially Victim of Its Own Success ? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-18 Pierre-Marie Dupuy
-
India and Bilateral Investment Treaties: Refusal, Acceptance, Backlash ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-18 Sanjna Pramod
-
Contributory Fault and Investor Misconduct in Investment Arbitration ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-17 Emmanuel T Laryea
-
The 2019 Morocco Model BIT: Moving Forwards, Backwards or Roundabout in Circles? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Arpan Banerjee,Simon Weber
Abstract The Moroccan Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) (2019) adds to a growing body of ‘new-generation’ model BITs that have fuelled the conversation on reforming the investment arbitration system. Broadly speaking, such agreements have attempted to rethink means of dispute resolution and traditional investment protection standards while adding detailed investor obligations and standards of
-
The 2019 Morocco Model BIT: Moving Forwards, Backwards or Roundabout in Circles? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Arpan Banerjee,Simon Weber
Abstract The Moroccan Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) (2019) adds to a growing body of ‘new-generation’ model BITs that have fuelled the conversation on reforming the investment arbitration system. Broadly speaking, such agreements have attempted to rethink means of dispute resolution and traditional investment protection standards while adding detailed investor obligations and standards of
-
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile: Assignment of Investment Treaty Claims and Jus Standi of the Assignee ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Danielle Morris,Cem Kalelioğlu
-
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile: Layers of Preclusion ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Niccolò Ridi
-
The Use of the UNIDROIT Principles and Other Transnational Principles of Commercial Law in Treaty Arbitration: Hazards and Opportunities ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Andrea Carlevaris
Abstract The UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts and more generally transnational principles of commercial law are often relied on, not only by international commercial arbitral tribunals, but also by investment tribunals. In rare cases, investment tribunals have relied on such principles as applicable law per se. More frequently, transnational principles have been relied on to
-
-
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile: Layers of Preclusion ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Niccolò Ridi
-
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile: Assignment of Investment Treaty Claims and Jus Standi of the Assignee ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Danielle Morris,Cem Kalelioğlu
-
The Use of the UNIDROIT Principles and Other Transnational Principles of Commercial Law in Treaty Arbitration: Hazards and Opportunities ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-08 Andrea Carlevaris
Abstract The UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts and more generally transnational principles of commercial law are often relied on, not only by international commercial arbitral tribunals, but also by investment tribunals. In rare cases, investment tribunals have relied on such principles as applicable law per se. More frequently, transnational principles have been relied on to
-
Michael Anthony Lee-Chin v Dominican Republic: Interpreting the Consent to Arbitrate in the CARICOM–DR FTA ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-03 Giuliana Lampo,Gustavo Minervini
-
Michael Anthony Lee-Chin v Dominican Republic: Interpreting the Consent to Arbitrate in the CARICOM–DR FTA ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-03-03 Giuliana Lampo,Gustavo Minervini
-
Article 38: The Treatment of Interest in International Investment Arbitration ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-25 Beharry C, Hugues J.
AbstractGiven the breadth of topics in the Articles on State Responsibility, the guidance on interest contained in Article 38 could be easily overlooked. Yet discussions on this subject featured prominently in the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) spanning nearly four decades. Article 38 is also intrinsically relevant to international investment arbitration where the coveted remedy is
-
Post-Termination Responsibility of States?—The Impact of Amendment/Modification, Suspension and Termination of Investment Treaties on (Vested) Rights of Investors ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-19 Reinisch A, Mansour Fallah S.
AbstractThe recent practice of States to amend, suspend or terminate investment treaties has moved questions of potential ‘post-termination responsibility’ to the forefront of the contemporary legal discourse in international investment law. Although States have often included provisions in their respective treaties to regulate post-termination protection of investments, some aspects of the aftermath
-
Causation and the Draft Articles on State Responsibility ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-12 Pearsall P.
Few issues have proven to be as vexing to courts and tribunals as the matter of causation. The causation inquiry calls for nuanced exploration of sometimes metaphysical concepts—overdetermination, novus actus interveniens, probability—while serving the practical function of balancing over-deterrence against the enforcement of legal rights. Indeed, as Aristotle famously instructs: we do not know something
-
Cairn Energy v India: Continuity in the Use of ILC Articles on State Responsibility ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-15 Prabhash Ranjan
-
Temporal Issues Relating to BIT Dispute Resolution ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-15 Murphy S.
AbstractAn investor–State tribunal formed under a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) may be called upon to determine its jurisdiction ratione temporis based on various ‘critical dates’ such as: the date of entry into force of the BIT; the date when the investment was made; the date when the investor acquired the requisite nationality; the date of the alleged breach; the date when the investor first
-
A Guide to General Principles of Law in International Investment Arbitration ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-10 Särkänne K.
DumberryPatrick, A Guide to General Principles of Law in International Investment Arbitration (Oxford University Press 2020), ISBN: 9780198857075, pp 416 (print copy £132.50)
-
Judging at the Interface: Deference to State Decision-Making Authority in International Adjudication ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-02-09 Dautaj Y.
ShirlowEsmé, Judging at the Interface: Deference to State Decision-Making Authority in International Adjudication (Cambridge University Press 2021), ISBN: 978-1-108-49097, pp 376, £95.00
-
State Succession and State Responsibility in the Context of Investor-State Dispute Settlement ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2022-01-25 Marcelo G Kohen,Patrick Dumberry
-
Unión Fenosa Gas v Egypt: The Necessity Defense: Much Ado about Nothing? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-12-23 Sarah Cassella
-
2019 FRESHFIELDS LECTURE Investment Arbitration and State Sovereignty ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Brigitte Stern
First of all, let me thank the organizers of this event, who have invited me to give this year’s Freshfields Lecture,2 which I consider a great honor as well as a difficult challenge. Why a difficult challenge? Because I do not want to say too little, as I like to share my thoughts and not hide behind a lukewarm and banal speech. But neither should I say too much, thus putting the audience’s dinner
-
Erratum ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-27
Emmanuel Gaillard and Ilija Mitrev Penushliski. State Compliance with Investment Awards. ICSID Review, 2020. doi:10.1093/icsidreview/siaa034
-
The UK Supreme Court Judgment in Micula v Romania:1 A Landmark Judgment for the Relationship between EU Law and International Investment Law? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-10-23 Aikaterini Florou
In a judgment dated 19 February 2020 (Judgment), the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court drew the curtain on the enforcement proceedings in the Micula v Romania Award (Award) in the UK. The court found in favor of the Claimants and lifted the stay of enforcement of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) award, holding that the stay conflicted with the UK’s obligations
-
Theodoros Adamakopoulos and others v Cyprus:1 Multiparty Arbitration Takes One Step Forward, Two Steps Back ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-10-21 Ridhi Kabra
In August 2011, an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Tribunal in Abaclat v Argentina considered and upheld, for the first time, an investment treaty tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear claims pursued jointly by a ‘mass’ of approximately 60,000 claimants (‘mass claims’).3 Two subsequent Tribunals deciding cases pursued by smaller pools of 119 and 183 claimants—Ambiente Ufficio
-
Interocean v Nigeria: Can a Domestic Investment Statute Provide the Basis for Claims under Customary International law? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-10-08 Tolu Obamuroh
-
Itisaluna and Others v Iraq: The OIC Agreement Conundrum: Consent to ICSID Arbitration and the MFN Clauses Saga ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-10-06 Mohamed S Abdel Wahab
-
Attribution of Conduct to a State ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-09-30 Carlo de Stefano
This article examines the application of ARSIWA’s provisions on attribution of conduct to a State in international investment law and arbitration. In particular, it critically analyses the rules of attribution of conduct codified in ARSIWA Articles 4 (conduct of organs of a State), 5 (conduct of persons or entities exercising elements of governmental authority), 7 (excess of authority or contravention
-
International Investment Law and Competition Law ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-09-02 Cristani F.
GómezKatia FachGourgourinisAnastasiosTitiCatharine (eds), European Yearbook of International Economic Law. Special Issue: International Investment Law and Competition Law (Springer 2020), ISBN 9783030339159, EUR 96.29
-
Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile: ‘ICSID’s Longest-Running Case’ An introduction to the Agora ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Antonio R Parra
-
Competence Ratione Personae of Investment Tribunals: Claims Arising Out of Measures under the European Banking Union Framework ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-24 Aikaterini Strantzali
During the past decade, claims pertaining to measures of the financial sector have started to multiply before international investment fora. Whereas there were 33 cases during the period 1996-2011, the number increased to 51 between 2012 and 2019.2 This sector encompasses many types of disputes. The present article focuses on those arising out of regulatory measures of the European Union (EU).
-
Quantum and Reasons in Investment Treaty Arbitration: The Next Reasoning Frontier? ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-01 Sean Stephenson
Reasons are fundamental to the development of the investment treaty arbitration regime. Transparent and public awards, which set out how and why decisions are made, have provided a basis for the rapid development of international investment law. Reasoning of certain awards, notably those stemming from the Argentine financial crisis, has provided the basis for significant debate relating to consistency
-
ISDS Reform: The Long View ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-10 José E Alvarez
This lecture surveys the criticisms directed at international investment agreements (IIAs) and their reliance on investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), as well as the leading reform venues that have been addressing such criticisms: UNCTAD, ICSID, and UNCITRAL. It argues that despite these ambitious efforts, the international investment regime’s reliance on investor-State arbitration will not be
-
Rand and Sembi v Serbia Transparency between Memory and Prophecy ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-01 Dimitrij Euler
The dispute in Rand and Sembi v Serbia concerned land located near the Serbian capital’s airport, which was owned by foreign investors. The investors—Rand Investments Limited, William Archibald Rand, Kathleen Elizabeth Rand, Allison Ruth Rand, Robert Harry Leander Rand (the Rands) and Sembi Investment Limited (Sembi)—claimed that their rights as investors were compromised by a Serbian privatisation
-
Manchester Securities v Poland Denial of Justice in the European Union ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-07-19 Filip Balcerzak, Jarrod Hepburn
The award of 7 December 2018 in Manchester Securities Corporation v Poland (Award), a case under the United States–Poland bilateral investment treaty (BIT),4 is notable for its finding of denial of justice against a Member State of the European Union. The Tribunal’s analysis of the issue is distinctive, drawing on factors more typically seen in specific claims of breach of the fair and equitable treatment
-
Canepa v Spain1Some Observations Regarding the Relationship between ICSID Arbitrators and Third-Party Funders ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-04 Jean-Christophe Honlet, Nandakumar Srivatsa
On 19 November 2019, the unchallenged arbitrators of the Canepa v Spain Tribunal, acting as the deciding authority under Article 58 of the ICSID Convention,4 rejected Spain’s proposal to disqualify the Claimants-appointed arbitrator in the case.5 One of the grounds for disqualification advanced by Spain pertained to the relationship between the Claimants’ appointee and a third-party funder.6 To the
-
The Potential Impact of the 2020 UAE FDI Decree and Side Agreements ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-03 Tareq Na’el Al-Tawil, Venugopal Prabhakar Gantasala, Walaaeldeen Ibraheem
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has assumed a leading role in attracting foreign investments in the region through the implementation of the Foreign Direct Investment Law of 2018 (FDI Law). The goal of the FDI Law is to create a pathway and framework that would enable 100 percent foreign ownership of UAE limited liability companies beyond the allowed 49 percent cap in mainland UAE. The efforts have
-
The Energy Charter Treaty: A Commentary ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-08-01 Ma S.
KajHobér, The Energy Charter Treaty: A Commentary (OUP2020), ISBN 9780199660995, US $330.00
-
Crippling Compensation in the International Law Commission and Investor–State Arbitration ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-07-19 Martins Paparinskis
Is there an exception to the principle of full reparation in international investment arbitration for cases in which full compensation is crippling for the responsible State or its peoples? The routine presentation and consideration of billion-dollar-plus investment arbitration claims in the first half of 2021 suggests that this subject has not been invented in order to enable it to be written about
-
Herzig v Turkmenistan 1 Requests for Security for Costs in ICSID Arbitrations Involving Third-Party Funded Insolvent Claimants ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-07-13 Christina L Beharry
Until recently, requests for security for costs (SfC) were relatively rare. Earlier cases that dealt with SfC applications imposed a high threshold that may have had a deterrent effect on States. Although tribunals have remained reluctant to grant such requests, there has been a gradual rise in the number of SfC applications made by States. This emerging trend may be partially due to the growing use
-
OI European Group BV v Venezuela1: Developments and Divergences in the Interpretation of Articles 52(1)(a) and (d) of the ICSID Convention ICSID Rev. Foreign Invest. Law J. (IF 0.976) Pub Date : 2021-07-09 Ndanga Kamau
In a Decision dated 6 December 2018 (Decision on Annulment), the ad hoc Committee (Committee) in OI European Group v Venezuela rejected Venezuela’s application for annulment in its entirety. Venezuela applied to annul the award dated 10 March 20153 (Award) on four of the five grounds available for annulment under Article 52(1) of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States