Bogdanov, Agurdino–Invest Ltd and Agurdino–Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova

Abstract

Jurisdiction — Claims for compensation — Procedural default of Respondent State — Relevance — Independent evaluation of facts and legal arguments of Claimant — Claim under Moldovan law — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction under Moldova–Russian Federation Bilateral Investment Treaty — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction ratione materiae and ratione temporis — Jurisdiction ratione personae — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction over claims of foreign investor — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction over claims of companies incorporated in Moldova — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction over Respondent State — Whether Tribunal having authority to correct relief sought — Whether Respondent State’s actions violating principle of non–retroactivity under Moldovan law — Whether Respondent State’s actions violating obligations under BIT

State responsibility — Moldova — Department of Privatization — Whether conduct of Department attributable to State — Article 4 of ILC Articles on State Responsibility

Applicable law — Article 24 of SCC Arbitration Rules — Moldova–Russian Federation Bilateral Investment Treaty — Moldovan law — Whether Respondent State’s actions violating Moldovan law — Whether Respondent State’s actions violating its international treaty obligations under BIT

Municipal law — Moldovan law — Claim made under Moldovan law — Article 43 of Foreign Investment Act — Principle of non–retroactivity of legislation — Moldovan authority’s discretion — Whether Claimant accepting risk that compensation by Moldova unsatisfactory — Whether Respondent State’s actions violating Moldovan law

Treaties — Moldova–Russian Federation Bilateral Investment Treaty — Full protection standard — Whether Respondent State’s conduct violating Moldovan law — Whether full protection clause correction of host State’s legislation — Whether Respondent State’s conduct violating full protection standard — Article 2 of BIT

Treaties — Moldova–Russian Federation Bilateral Investment Treaty — Fair and equitable treatment — Whether Respondent State’s conduct violating fair and equitable treatment guarantee — Whether discriminatory — Relevance — Purpose of BIT — Legitimate expectation of foreign investor — Article 3 of BIT

Treaties — Moldova–Russian Federation Bilateral Investment Treaty — Indirect expropriation — Whether applying only to measures affecting totality or substantial part of investment — Whether Respondent’s conduct violating prohibition of indirect compensation without adequate compensation — Article 6 of BIT

Damages — Assessment — Liability for loss — Whether foreign investor partially responsible for signing contract with unlimited Moldovan authority discretion — Whether moral damages appropriate — Interest — Currency

Costs — Costs of the arbitration — Lack of cooperation by Respondent State — Relevance — Parties’ costs