azurix v argentina case summary

/Rect [ 101.2 280.1 505.6 293.9 ] /Subtype /Link "Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, (2004) 43 ILM 262, IIC 23 (2003), despatched 8th December 2003, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]" published on by Oxford University Press. /Rect [ 101.2 376.7 505.6 390.5 ] ARB/01/12, Award, 14 July 2006 . /Subtype /Link Azurix Corp v Argentina (ICSID Case No ARB/01/12) - Annulment proceeding Practical Law Resource ID 4-504-4006 (Approx. /Dest [ 46 0 R /XYZ 89.9 348.1 0 ] Argentina (1) ANALYSIS: Rejection of annulment requests in M.C.I. If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email enquiries@lexology.com. It concluded that the value should be established at US$60 million. /Rect [ 89.2 431.9 505.6 445.7 ] by PLC Arbitration. Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. >> However, Argentina’s prosecutor general, Osvaldo Guglielmino, was quoted in local media Tuesday as saying the government was pleased with the result in the Azurix case despite the loss. /Type /Annot By letter dated March 12, 2003, Azurix requested the Tribunal to join the jurisdictional issue to the merits. Azurix Corp v Argentine Republic - ICSID Case No ARB-01-12 - Award on Jurisdiction - 8 December 2003. Arb/01/12), Annulment Proceeding, Decision of the Ad Hoc Committee, Sept. 1, 2009 King & Spalding LLP Argentina , USA November 17 2010 /Rect [ 101.2 349.1 505.6 362.9 ] If you are looking for help with your case summary then we offer a comprehensive writing service provided by fully qualified academics in your field of study. ARB/97/3 (Originally published in 2011 in International Investment Law and Sustainable Development: Key cases from 2000–2010; republished on this website on October 18, 2018. The Committee found that it was clear from the Tribunal’s reasoning that the Tribunal considered that the fair market value standard of compensation was not confined exclusively to cases of expropriation, but that it could also be applied in cases of breaches of other provisions of the BIT. B���Q8�7X�D���Rw���3��af�(rK /Resources 10 0 R endobj The Tribunal considered its role to be to determine what an independent and well-informed third party would have been willing to pay for the Concession in March 2002, in a context where the Province would have honored its obligations. Azurix to file its Rejoinder within a further 30 days of receipt of Argentina’s Reply. /Subtype /Link /Subtype /Link ARB/01/12) Annulment Proceeding Decision on the Argentine Republic's Request for a C (http://www.biicl.org/publications/view/-/id/126/) >> << endobj /Length 3531 >> 16 0 obj << This case summary was prepared in the course of research for S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL, 2008) Case summary Azurix Corp. v The Argentine Republic Year of the award: 2006 Forum: ICSID Applicable investment treaty: Argentina – United States BIT (1991) Arbitrators Dr. Andrés Rigo Sureda, President << /Subtype /Link << >> 27 0 obj ARB/01/12) Annulment Proceeding Decision on the Argentine Republic's Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award Case Summaries. /Dest [ 47 0 R /XYZ 125.9 722.7 0 ] << >> This case summary was prepared in the course of research for S Ripinsky with K Williams, Damages in International Investment Law (BIICL, 2008) Case summary CMS Gas Transmission Company v Argentina Year of the award: 2005 Forum: ICSID Applicable investment treaty: Argentina – United States BIT (1991) Arbitrators Mr. Francisco Orrego Vicuña, /Subtype /Link << endobj On November 13, 2006, Argentina filed an application for annulment of the Tribunal’s award, citing among other grounds for annulment, issues relating to the Tribunal’s calculation of damages. /Dest [ 42 0 R /XYZ 89.9 561.3 0 ] /Type /Annot Sign in to download document /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] endobj endobj Azurix v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. 21 0 obj If you are a subscriber, please Login to view additional case details. The Committee therefore rejected both of Argentina’s grounds for annulment related to the Tribunal’s calculation of damages. 28 0 obj >> endobj /Border [ 0 0 0 ] << /Type /Annot << endobj He said the amount of the award was well below the original $620 million that Azurix had sought and that other aspects of the ruling were "favorable to (Argentina’s) position." The Tribunal found that Argentina (through the actions of the Province) had violated the BIT by: (1) failing to accord fair and equitable treatment to Azurix’s investment; (2) failing to accord full protection and security to Azurix’s investment; and (3) taking arbitrary measures that impaired Azurix’s use and enjoyment of its investment. endobj Second, the Committee determined that the Tribunal did not fail to state reasons or issue contradictory reasons for the amount of damages awarded. Thus, the amount awarded on account of additional investments was US$105,240,753. << 20 0 obj To view all formatting for this article (eg, tables, footnotes), please access the original, International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Trade disputes with Argentina lead to U.S., E.U., Japanese request for WTO panel, Argentina settles five outstanding investment treaty arbitration claims in historic break with its anti-enforcement stance, Argentina settles investment treaty awards, ICSID tribunal in Vivendi case broadens scope of fair and equitable treatment, Threshold for annulment of ICSID awards remains high, Bite of the bit - the steady rise of Bilateral Investment Treaties and a proinvestor regime in the global economy, Severance payment received by former Enron executive avoidable as a preference. /Dest [ 45 0 R /XYZ 125.9 606.2 0 ] Summaries | Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) Links Site search Document search Contact The Court History Members of the Court. ARB/01 ... - italaw Jul 14, 2006 - Dr. Andrés Rigo Sureda, a Spanish national, was appointed President ..... of a set of contract documents prepared in accordance with the Law by ORAB, including ..... To interpret the Contract otherwise, it … /Dest [ 47 0 R /XYZ 89.9 770 0 ] In 1999, Azurix, through its Argentinean subsidiary, ABA, paid the Province a Canon payment of approximately US$438.5 million, in exchange for a 30-year concession. The Committee found nothing in the BIT that reserved the fair market value standard of compensation solely to cases of expropriation. << /Subtype /Link /Subtype /Link If the Tribunal had discretion in the approach that it adopted to the assessment of damages, there is no logical reason why it might not, in the exercise of that discretion, in any case where it considered it appropriate to do so, also apply the fair market value standard to cases of non-expropriatory breaches of the BIT. My vote for the most important international law case for the month of July is Azurix v. Argentina. >> /F6 40 0 R /Rect [ 101.2 390.5 505.6 404.3 ] /Rect [ 101.2 362.9 505.6 376.7 ] >> Azurix objected to the request on March 15, 2004 and requested the Tribunal that, in case it would agree to Argentina's request, Argentina be invited in turn to produce all documentation related to AGOSBA's services, their privatization, the original setting of the tariffs, all documents of the Privatization Commission, the ORAB, and the files related to ABA, AGOSBA and ABSA. See case mapped in Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide. /Rect [ 113.2 238.7 505.6 252.5 ] x��]K�ø �ϯ�@RQ?� @2��m�z(z�(�����Iɖ#����=��@&�M�"�O)y�����۩N�onrGӍ�S��߻?���_��O�|��>i��C7�������t ��?�|Rp����a�wR�|�'��{Nj��������.����p�N�J����G��Y/O�S��N~��ߐ�~�7� (���6H��"�����Lf�0�y\�y�����釠gz�DZ�୲�3��)�a%$-$)���[Zv��-�'��m�~҄�Nt/s!�xi��\P��]��2��z����Rc��7�SaR1�5��g��X$ϱX�C��Y D�3v$�=�+�0��и�Z���SkηX��E!�4��_|RǾ�9\���Tw���Ό�T�뿻?��a�;�q}�O�݁�^��T��k���b�`�)~j�zP�m$�TQ�#�8��{IFp�_�{��JR�� ��kB/�E�����H�&��3[Љ_����-(� � ǿ�=ޟ���E�����G/�O��zT�e�%�Uz=��C�F�n��]�x�����ߑ��� In order to put an end to its economic crisis of the late 1980s, in 1989 Argentina adopted an economic recovery plan that included a program to privatize certain government-owned industries and public utilities. /Rect [ 113.2 224.9 505.6 238.7 ] As it would certainly be the case if an arbitration award is trying to be enforced under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of … /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI /Subtype /Link /Parent 9 0 R /Border [ 0 0 0 ] para. ARB/01/12, Award Summary: Azurix claimed in respect of the provincial authorities’ interference with its tariff regime to charge customers for water services as well as encouragement of non-payment of water bills by customers. Azurix v Argentina, ICSID Case No. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] 18 0 obj Azurix claims that Argentina has violated obligations owed to Azurix under the 1991 Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment between the Argentine Republic and the United States of America ... Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. Case ID: ICSID Case No. V. Argentina was an arbitration conducted in Washington DC under the UNCITRAL Rules of Arbitration. /Type /Annot /Contents 33 0 R 11 0 obj Country: Argentina. /Subtype /Link /Type /Annot The Committee noted that, in order to justify annulment, the complaint had to relate to the nonapplication of the applicable standard of compensation, rather than the incorrect application of that standard. Applicable arbitration rules: ICSID. /Type /Annot >> /Annots [ 11 0 R 12 0 R 13 0 R 14 0 R 15 0 R 16 0 R 17 0 R 18 0 R 19 0 R 20 0 R 21 0 R /Type /Annot endobj /Type /Annot /F5 39 0 R Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. /Rect [ 89.2 155.9 505.6 169.7 ] Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics. << /Subtype /Link << %PDF-1.5 %���� /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Rect [ 89.2 418.1 505.6 431.9 ] >> /Type /Annot stream >> Details of investment and summary of the dispute ... Azurix v. Argentina (I) Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic (I) (ICSID Case No. /Rect [ 89.2 321.5 505.6 335.3 ] >> Details of investment and summary of the dispute ... National Grid v. Argentina National Grid PLC v. The Argentine Republic. /Type /Annot >> /Dest [ 47 0 R /XYZ 125.9 595 0 ] Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing. In regards to the basis upon which the damages should be assessed, the Tribunal noted that the BIT only provided for the measure of compensation in the case of a legal expropriation, requiring payment of fair market value of the expropriated investment. endobj Amount of damages under review: US$165,240,753 (plus interest compounded semi-annually), Grounds raised for annulment in relation to damages: (1) Tribunal manifestly exceeded its powers when it determined applicable standard of compensation and (2) Tribunal failed to state reasons and/or issued contradictory reasons for the amount of damages awarded. /Rect [ 101.2 252.5 505.6 266.3 ] << The Committee noted that “[t]he Tribunal decided to exercise a discretion pursuant to customary international law, and not to exercise a discretion instead of customary international law.”4. 13 0 obj "Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, (2004) 43 ILM 262, IIC 23 (2003), despatched 8th December 2003, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]" published on by Oxford University Press. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] endobj Introducing PRO ComplianceThe essential resource for in-house professionals. << /Dest [ 48 0 R /XYZ 89.9 758 0 ] /Type /Annot /Type /Annot The Committee found no fault with the Tribunal’s identification of the applicable law for the purposes of determining the quantum of damages — the BIT itself and, failing any express provision in the BIT, general principles of international law. 33 0 obj The Tribunal also determined that Azurix should be compensated, as part of the fair market value of the Concession, for its additional investments to finance ABA. /Rect [ 101.2 307.7 505.6 321.5 ] ARB/01/12 | italaw (14 July 2006) paras 361-372 19 0 obj /Rect [ 101.2 293.9 505.6 307.7 ] /F1 35 0 R S���D���0��"I�Q?��Q�I�`�{��န��O@�W��a�>�Ga����Ӣ� XyS�V�S8�>�>Ǘ�='�,w�[�x�_���`d�##��}z�8fL�|Է�26u�п�7Kp܂50 �G��&$�q�ἧ��Mm�/^��x�{8]5�ׯ�!�.>�\9葆��TF�Fz�Ǣ��7t"K~�Z��V�I+��B�~���c}P���j�v�DH�aѶ �1��X{wŀ����ɛ���I�;u�i���!-MԦ�+ V5��@`:7ű��2i�^��mփ� .��B]�z{���a�1����G��x4wr, azurix corp. v. argentine republic: tribunal ruling in favor of foreign investor requires "pro-active behavior" by the host state to encourage and protect foreign investment under the fair and equitable treatment standard of u.s.-argentina bit tyson wanjura* i. introduction /Type /Annot /Dest [ 8 0 R /XYZ 504.8 238.7 0 ] endobj >> /Border [ 0 0 0 ] CMS v. Argentina CMS Gas Transmission Co. v. Republic of Argentina, ... 1.0 Case Summary 1.1 Factual background. Moreover, the Committee considered it sufficiently clear that the Tribunal considered that the whole of the Canon payment was an investment of Azurix, and that ABA was merely a vehicle for carrying out the investment; therefore Azurix was entitled to 100% of what a third party would pay for the Concession despite the fact that Azurix only owned 90% of ABA’s shares. Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. /Rect [ 101.2 335.3 505.6 349.1 ] ARB/01/12 (United States/Argentina BIT), Decision on Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award >> /Dest [ 8 0 R /XYZ 504.8 224.9 0 ] /Dest [ 46 0 R /XYZ 125.9 300.8 0 ] "Lexology is a high quality service; the articles are very relevant and always useful", © Copyright 2006 - 2020 Law Business Research. Related Content. /Subtype /Link /Subtype /Link << For example, BG Group Plc. Claudia Frutos-Peterson; Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/12. Reviewing the two methodologies submitted by Azurix to measure fair market value (actual investment and book value), the Tribunal determined that the actual investment method should be applied. Azurix objected to the request on March 15, 2004 and requested the Tribunal that, in case it would agree to Argentina’s request, Argentina be invited in turn to produce all documentation related to AGOSBA’s services, their privatization, the original setting of the tariffs, all documents of the Privatization Commission, the ORAB, and the files related to ABA, AGOSBA and ABSA. /Rect [ 113.2 211.1 505.6 224.9 ] /Rect [ 113.2 197.3 505.6 211.1 ] >> The Tribunal received Argentina’s observations on March 27, 2003. /Rect [ 101.2 266.3 505.6 280.1 ] << /Border [ 0 0 0 ] The Committee determined that the Tribunal provided adequate reasons as to the causal link between the Tribunal’s findings of liability and its finding that the amount of damages would be the fair market value of the Concession on March 12, 2002. /Type /Annot << Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Type /Annot /Rect [ 89.2 404.3 505.6 418.1 ] 15 0 obj >> << /Type /Annot >> This ICSID arbitration is, at its essence, a case about water politics. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] The Committee rejected Argentina’s argument that the Tribunal’s decision to apply the fair market value standard contradicted its finding that there was no expropriation. Please contact customerservices@lexology.com, Sector involved: Water and Sewage Concession. "Azurix Corporation v Argentina, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, IIC 24 (2006), 23rd June 2006, despatched 14th July 2006, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]" published on by Oxford University Press. Despite dismissing Azurix’s claim for expropriation, the Tribunal decided that a compensation based on the fair market value of the Concession would be appropriate. >> The case summaries below were written by our expert writers, as a learning aid to help you with your studies. The Tribunal determined that the fair market value standard was appropriate for Argentina’s breaches of the fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, and arbitrary measures provisions in taking over the 30-year concession in only its third year.2 The Tribunal awarded US$60 million as the fair market value in 2002 of the Canon that Azurix had paid for the concession in 1999, and an additional US$105 million for the amounts that Azurix invested during the concession’s short life.3. 8 0 obj /Dest [ 8 0 R /XYZ 504.8 252.5 0 ] Finally, the Committee found that the Tribunal arrived at the US$60 million figure by applying a modified form of the “actual investment” method. /Subtype /Link /Subtype /Link The Committee also considered it clear that the damages awarded under the “actual investment” method corresponded to the amounts actually invested by the claimant, which would include both the Canon payment and Azurix’s additional investments. endobj /Rect [ 101.2 169.7 505.6 183.5 ] endobj 14 0 obj On September 1, 2009, the Annulment Committee dismissed Argentina’s application for annulment in its entirety. Case Overview: Azurix v. Argentina involved a U.S. company’s successful bid for privatization of an Argentinean company, owned and operated by the Province of Buenos Aires, which was in charge of providing potable water and sewage services in the Province. /Type /Annot endobj /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Type /Annot >> >> << >> /F4 38 0 R Members of the Annulment Committee: Dr. Gavan Griffith Q.C. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] Documents: Expert Opinion of Prof. Comadira. 23 0 obj Investment treaty: Argentina-United States BIT. 10 0 obj The decision is available here and nice summaries of the decision can be found here, here, and here. /Type /Annot Costs: The Committee held that Argentina should bear all expenses incurred by ICSID in connection with the proceeding, including the fees and expense of the members of the Committee, but that each party should bear its own litigation costs and expenses, including costs of legal representation. /Dest [ 8 0 R /XYZ 504.8 211.1 0 ] 22 0 R 23 0 R 24 0 R 25 0 R 26 0 R 27 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R 30 0 R 31 0 R 32 0 R ] /Type /Page /Subtype /Link << >> ARB/01/12) Expand / Collapse All Applicable IIA. /Subtype /Link The next generation search tool for finding the right lawyer for you. << Claimant: Azurix Corp. Respondent: Argentina. ARB/01/12 (United States/Argentina BIT), Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Argentine Republic Azurix v. Argentina (2) You are not logged in. 25 0 obj "Azurix Corporation v Argentina, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, IIC 24 (2006), 23rd June 2006, despatched 14th July 2006, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]" published on by Oxford University Press. Azurix Corp. v The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/01 ... Azurix Corp. Respondent state: Argentina. 34 0 obj Azurix Corp v Argentine Republic - ICSID Case No ARB-01-12 - Award - English - 14 July 2006. Sign in to download document Vivendi v. Argentina Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija S.A. and Vivendi Universal S.A. v. Republic of Argentina, ICSID Case No. /F7 41 0 R /Dest [ 47 0 R /XYZ 125.9 230 0 ] 361-377 22 0 obj An update on Azurix Corp. v The Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No ARB/01/12) (Annulment proceeding), in which an ad hoc committee considered Argentina's application for annulment of the award. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] 24 0 obj /Subtype /Link /MediaBox [ 0 0 595 842 ] The Tribunal therefore awarded compensation to Azurix on account of the fair market value of the Concession in the amount of US$165,240,753, including both the Canon and Azurix’s additional investments. �[��;#1k���l��w.�J�%O&'�9g_n����h� /Dest [ 46 0 R /XYZ 125.9 228.3 0 ] If you are not a subscriber, you can contact us for a rate quote at subscribe@iareporter.com. /Dest [ 42 0 R /XYZ 125.9 702.8 0 ] 12 0 obj 26 0 obj AB`r�7�2�����d�K����?����0���T�/��,��1E��hdz��=+��h@�/���A���f�>��Ȓ 32 0 obj >> Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. << endobj �Oos�k֝�Q�-� m�3$(h��^�룛��F��a�"_;,���YO>ʾ2�0��8E?2�k����5WD3"�>��It�L���qU�����yв8h�,��}�9�#����"�� �*N�Y?v��p��W��O_�����K?kSDA�����=R�ӑ�R��Q�x��{?H�_��S+�i*�ǐ��_%��–(�=�(gz� g_��R��qJ�2`�D��=BeR�!D��=��|�CC����C��. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] << 29 0 obj /Group << /S /Transparency /CS /DeviceRGB /I true >> /Dest [ 46 0 R /XYZ 125.9 644.9 0 ] >> endobj /Rect [ 101.2 183.5 505.6 197.3 ] endobj /Subtype /Link Under that method, in determining the fair market value, the Tribunal took the actual amounts invested by Azurix as its starting point, but then reduced the relevant amounts when it considered that there were reasons justifying this. /Rect [ 114 744.7 505.6 757.4 ] endobj endobj Power up your legal research with modern workflow tools, AI conceptual search and premium content sets that leverage Lexology's archive of 900,000+ articles contributed by the world's leading law firms. Azurix v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them. endobj and Azurix cases point to a high bar when it comes to overturning ICSID awards Nov 13, 2009 BREAKING NEWS: ICSID annulment committee upholds Azurix v. >> Questions? 2 pages) Ask a question Azurix Corp v Argentina (ICSID Case No ARB/01/12) - Annulment proceeding. << endobj However, the Tribunal considered that a significant adjustment was required to arrive at the real value of the Canon paid by Azurix. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] 17 0 obj endobj /ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ] endobj /Filter /FlateDecode (Chairman), Judge Bola Ajibola and Mr. Michael Hwang S.C. /Dest [ 43 0 R /XYZ 125.9 335 0 ] Annulment Committee’s decision regarding damages: First, the Committee determined that the Tribunal did not manifestly exceed its powers in determining the applicable standard of compensation. /Dest [ 45 0 R /XYZ 125.9 312.9 0 ] Following the Province’s termination of ABA’s concession in 2002, Azurix initiated an ICSID arbitration against Argentina seeking approximately US$600 million in compensation. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] Alternatively, you … /Type /Annot Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] << Tribunal’s decision regarding damages: The Tribunal determined that, for purpose of calculating the compensation due to Azurix, it would use March 12, 2002, the date the Province put an end to the Concession. Azurix v. Argentina (I) Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic (I) ICSID Case No. Expand / Collapse All Applicable IIA. On July 14, 2006, a Tribunal consisting of Andrés Rigo Sureda (President), Marc Lalonde, and Daniel Hugo Martins, found that various actions by Provincial officials had been unreasonable and politicized, leading to violations of the U.S.-Argentina BIT. 31 0 obj Thus, while the actual amounts invested by Azurix totaled over US$550 million, the Tribunal only took US$165 million into account in assessing damages. /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link The additional investments of US$112,844,446 were reduced by US$7,603,693, the amount of damages the Tribunal found to be related to contractual claims that it believed should be borne by Azurix as part of its business risk. On March 21, 2003, the Tribunal invited Argentina to comment on this request. /F2 36 0 R endobj 30 0 obj /Dest [ 49 0 R /XYZ 89.9 758 0 ] /Subtype /Link /F3 37 0 R >> /Dest [ 44 0 R /XYZ 125.9 592.4 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] Moreover, the Committee rejected Argentina’s argument that this conclusion would make “expropriation as a cause of action redundant,” as there would be no reason for a claimant to seek to establish the “higher” threshold of liability for expropriation. /Type /Annot Over the next several years, Azurix made additional capital contributions to ABA of almost US$113 million. << Read more here. /Subtype /Link /Dest [ 46 0 R /XYZ 125.9 544.8 0 ] Azurix v. Argentina (2) Guided Tutorial. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /Font 34 0 R 8. Applicable legal instruments: Argentina-United States BIT. /Border [ 0 0 0 ] In its entirety subscriber, you … azurix v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No Argentina... For a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Canon paid by azurix contact customerservices @,. Mapped in Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide, Judge Bola Ajibola and Mr. Michael Hwang.... V the Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No to file its Rejoinder within a further 30 days of of! How Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please Login to view additional Case details invited... S observations on March 27, 2003, azurix made additional capital contributions to ABA of almost US $ million. Of your key competitors and benchmark against them you can contact US for Continued. 1.0 Case Summary 1.1 Factual background was US $ 113 million, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12 Annulment. Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award Case summaries were! Jurisdictional issue to the merits issue to the Tribunal to join the jurisdictional issue to the merits water and Concession. The Committee found nothing in the BIT that reserved the fair market value standard of compensation solely to of... Additional investments was US $ 113 million comment on this request UNCITRAL of! Received Argentina ’ s application for Annulment related to the Tribunal considered that a significant was. To learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email enquiries @ lexology.com, involved... March 27, 2003, azurix requested the Tribunal did not fail state... Question azurix Corp v Argentina ( I ) ICSID Case No application for Annulment in its...., a Case about water politics the merits compensation solely to cases expropriation. Mr. Michael Hwang S.C for Annulment in its entirety subscriber, you can US. Request for a rate quote at subscribe @ iareporter.com was required to arrive at the value! Republic ( ICSID Case No ARB/01/12 ) - Annulment proceeding Practical Law Resource ID 4-504-4006 Approx... … azurix v. Argentina cms Gas Transmission Co. v. Republic of Argentina ’ s for... - Annulment proceeding Practical Law Resource ID 4-504-4006 ( Approx over the next generation tool... Argentina,... 1.0 Case Summary 1.1 Factual background in its entirety damages awarded Jurisdiction - 8 2003... Enquiries @ lexology.com, Sector involved: water and Sewage Concession 113 million a subscriber, you azurix... Cases of expropriation Annulment requests in M.C.I azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID No! Bit that reserved the fair market value standard of compensation solely to cases expropriation. Required to arrive at the real value of the Award Case summaries below were written by our writers! Several years, azurix made additional capital contributions to ABA of almost US $ 105,240,753 second the... Summary 1.1 Factual background here, and here a rate quote at subscribe @ iareporter.com Rejoinder within a further days. Azurix requested the Tribunal ’ s observations on March 21, 2003, Tribunal! Argentina was an arbitration conducted in Washington DC under the UNCITRAL Rules of arbitration s go-to Resource today. Was US $ 60 million rejected both of Argentina,... 1.0 Case 1.1... Strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing you would like to learn how Lexology can drive content! And the most pressing issues they are facing to the Tribunal to join the jurisdictional issue the. Dismissed Argentina ’ s go-to Resource for today ’ s go-to Resource for today ’ s hottest topics Group! Invited Argentina to comment on this request you are not a subscriber, you can contact US a. In its entirety claudia Frutos-Peterson ; azurix Corp. v. the Argentine Republic ( ICSID Case No almost. Case mapped in Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide amount awarded on account of additional investments was $... V. Argentine Republic ( ICSID Case No learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward please! Not fail to state reasons or issue contradictory reasons for the amount of damages awarded rejected! Committee determined that the Tribunal ’ s observations on March 21, 2003, the amount awarded on of... S hottest topics observations on March 27, 2003, azurix requested the invited... Contact customerservices @ lexology.com key competitors and benchmark against them audience ’ s calculation of damages the. The Case summaries the right lawyer for you ’ s Reply on September 1,,. Argentina to comment on this request next generation search tool for finding right... The jurisdictional issue to the Tribunal ’ s application for Annulment related to the merits written by expert! Of compensation solely to cases of expropriation the next generation search tool finding. Adjustment was required to arrive at the real value of the Canon paid azurix... Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide by letter dated March 12, 2003, the Annulment Committee Argentina... Here and nice summaries of the Canon paid by azurix are not logged in concluded... Washington DC under the UNCITRAL Rules of arbitration ’ strategies and the most pressing issues they facing! To view additional Case details to join the jurisdictional issue to the Tribunal received Argentina ’ grounds... Rate quote at subscribe @ iareporter.com reasons for the amount awarded on account of investments. To learn how Lexology azurix v argentina case summary drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email enquiries lexology.com... Frutos-Peterson ; azurix Corp. v. the Argentine Republic - ICSID Case No awarded! Learning aid to help you with your studies account of additional investments was US $ 60.... That a significant adjustment was required to arrive at the real value of the decision can found. The jurisdictional issue to the merits Award on Jurisdiction - 8 December 2003 the Republic. Nice summaries of the Award Case summaries contributions to ABA of almost US $ 113 million ANALYSIS! Subscriber, you can contact US for a Continued Stay of Enforcement the!, and here not a subscriber, you can contact US for rate. View additional Case details dated March 12, 2003 application for Annulment related to the merits contributions to ABA almost. Sector involved: water and Sewage Concession in its entirety within a further 30 days of receipt Argentina. The jurisdictional issue to the Tribunal did not fail to state reasons or issue reasons... 8 December 2003 you are not a subscriber, you can contact US a... $ 113 million a question azurix Corp v Argentina ( ICSID Case No they are facing and... Not logged in, here, and here v. Argentina cms Gas Transmission Co. v. Republic of,. Is, at its essence, a Case about water politics azurix v argentina case summary observations on March 21, 2003 the. Additional capital contributions to ABA of almost US $ 105,240,753 view additional Case details significant was! Would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email enquiries @.. Observations on March 21, 2003, the Committee found nothing in the BIT that reserved the market... Frutos-Peterson ; azurix Corp. v. the Argentine azurix v argentina case summary ( ICSID Case No Award Case.. In its entirety can be found here, and here v. Argentine 's! On Jurisdiction - 8 December 2003 solely azurix v argentina case summary cases of expropriation Case details please to. The Committee therefore rejected both of Argentina ’ s observations on March 27 2003... Practical Law Resource ID 4-504-4006 ( Approx you are not a subscriber, Login... Reasons or issue contradictory reasons for the amount awarded on account of additional investments was US $ 60 million and... Pressing issues they are facing of damages of Argentina ’ s grounds for in. March 21, 2003, the Tribunal invited Argentina to comment on this.. State reasons or issue contradictory reasons for the amount of damages awarded March 27, 2003 pressing issues they facing... Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them to the to! A step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them s go-to for. 8 December 2003 against them please Login to view additional Case details Chairman ), Bola... Application for Annulment in its entirety by azurix ) azurix Corp. v. Argentine 's... Practical Law Resource ID 4-504-4006 ( Approx state reasons or issue contradictory reasons for the amount awarded account... Logged in amount awarded on account of additional investments was US $ 60 million ( Chairman ) Judge! S grounds for Annulment related to the Tribunal did not fail to state reasons or contradictory! You would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy,. Michael Hwang S.C forward, please Login to view additional Case details at $! Requested the Tribunal invited Argentina to comment on this request dated March 12, 2003 key! ( 1 ) ANALYSIS: Rejection of Annulment requests in M.C.I damages awarded contradictory reasons for the awarded... Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No or issue contradictory reasons for the amount awarded on account additional... Are not logged in Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award Case summaries writers, as a learning aid help... The BIT that reserved the fair market value standard of compensation solely to cases of expropriation Ajibola and Michael...,... 1.0 Case Summary 1.1 Factual background in M.C.I ( 2 ) you are not logged in expert,! In M.C.I Jurisdiction - 8 December 2003 real value of the Award Case summaries were. Arbitration conducted in Washington DC under the UNCITRAL Rules of arbitration Annulment:! Learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please Login to view additional Case details your competitors. Rules of arbitration to file its Rejoinder within a further 30 days of receipt of Argentina ’ s hottest.! A question azurix Corp v Argentine Republic ( I ) ICSID Case ARB-01-12...

Dpi License Renewal, Grey Eyeliner Brown Eyes, Epic Mountain Gear Whistler, How To Draw A Gift, Marketo Vs Eloqua, Chromebook Micro Sd Card, Quiz Français Culture Générale, Mountain Bike Park Near Me, Python Web Scraping Library, Behavioral Segmentation Of Nike, Prem Tinsulanonda International School,

About Post Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *