No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Orascom TMT Investments S.à.r.l. v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Abstract
Procedure — ICSID Arbitration Rule 27 — Whether the parties needed to agree on a procedural language
Evidence — Parallel proceedings — Confidential information — Whether materials from confidential parallel proceedings should be allowed into the arbitral record
Jurisdiction — Foreign investor — ICSID Convention, Article 25 — Corporate nationality — Meaning of siège social — Whether the nationality criteria in the BIT were reasonable and of objective significance — Whether pursuant to international law an ambiguous term in a definition of nationality should be interpreted by reference to criteria under the applicable national law or an autonomous notion of nationality — Whether siège social meant the registered office of the investor
Jurisdiction — Investment — Minority or indirect shareholding — Whether the investor made a contribution or allocation of resources for a duration with an expectation of commercial return — Whether the investment was located in the host State
Interpretation — VCLT, Article 31 — VCLT, Article 32 — Customary international law — Whether the rules of treaty interpretation supported a particular meaning of siège social — Whether supplementary means of interpretation confirmed the meaning of siège social — Whether the customary rules on diplomatic protection were relevant to treaty interpretation — Whether the contracting States intended to give the term “investment” an ordinary meaning or special meaning
Admissibility — Settlement — Claim preclusion — Whether the claims of a parent company were precluded by the settlement of an earlier claim on the same facts by a subsidiary company against the State under a different BIT — Whether the claim requested any distinct relief from the settled dispute — Whether the related settlement agreement had terminated the underlying dispute
Admissibility — Standing — Divestment — Whether the sale of shares in the company holding the investment prior to the notice of arbitration impacted on admissibility
Admissibility — Abuse of rights — Whether successive claims brought by entities within the same vertically integrated chain of companies under different BITs amounted to an abuse of process — Whether the principles of abuse of rights had evolved since earlier investment treaty jurisprudence
Costs — ICSID Convention, Article 61(2) — Whether the success on jurisdiction and failure on admissibility affected the allocation of costs
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press 2020