CUSTOM AND ITS INTERPRETATION IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW
Volume 2
Edited by
PANOS MERKOURIS
University of Groningen
ANDREAS KULICK
University of Tübingen
JOSÉ MANUEL ÁLVAREZ-ZARATE
Externado University of Colombia
MACIEJ ŻENKIEWICZ
Nicholas Copernicus University of Toruń
Assistant Editor
KONRAD TURNBULL
University of Groningen
Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8EA, United Kingdom
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi – 110025, India
103 Penang Road, #05–06/07, Visioncrest Commercial, Singapore 238467
Cambridge University Press is part of Cambridge University Press & Assessment, a department of the University of Cambridge.
We share the University’s mission to contribute to society through the pursuit of education, learning and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781009255424
DOI: 10.1017/9781009255462
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2024
This work is in copyright. It is subject to statutory exceptions and to the provisions of relevant licensing agreements; with the exception of the Creative Commons version the link for which is provided below, no reproduction of any part of this work may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
An online version of this work is published at doi.org/10.1017/9781009255462 under a Creative Commons Open Access license CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 which permits re-use, distribution and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes providing appropriate credit to the original work is given. You may not distribute derivative works without permission. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
All versions of this work may contain content reproduced under license from third parties. Permission to reproduce this third-party content must be obtained from these third-parties directly.
When citing this work, please include a reference to the DOI 10.1017/9781009255462
First published 2024
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library
A Cataloging-in-Publication data record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
ISBN 978-1-009-25542-4 Hardback
Cambridge University Press & Assessment has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
List of Contributors page viii
Foreword: Custom and International Investment Law
Horacio A Grigera Naón xiv
Table of Cases xvi
Table of International Treaties, Documents, and National Legislation xxxvi
List of Abbreviations xlvii
Part I Identifying Custom in International Investment Law
1 The ‘Minimum Standard of Treatment’ in International Investment Law: The Fascinating Story of the Emergence, Decline and Recent Resurrection of a Concept
Patrick Dumberry 3
2 Recourse to Legal Experts for the Establishment and Interpretation of Customary Norms in Investment Law
Saïda El Boudouhi 23
3 The Identification of Customary International Law and International Investment Law and Arbitration: State Practice in Connection with Investor-State Proceedings
Diego Mejía-Lemos 46
4 Assessing Damages in Customary International Law: The Chorzów’s Tale
José Manuel Álvarez-Zarate 71
Part II The Interpretation of Secondary Rules in International Investment Law
5 Uses of the Work of International Law Commission on State Responsibility in International Investment Arbitration
Sotirios-Ioannis Lekkas 93
6 Revisiting the Availability of Countermeasures in Investment Arbitration
Anna Ventouratou 123
7 Investment Tribunals, the Duty of Compensation in Cases of Necessity: A Customary Law Void?
Federica I Paddeu 151
8 A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside an Enigma: Equitable Considerations in the Assessment of Damages by Investment Tribunals
Emmanuel Giakoumakis 179
9 Conflict of Treaty Norms and Subsequent Agreements in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties in International Investment Law
Łukasz Kułaga 211
Part III Interpreting Customary International Rules: Current Challenges
10 Police Powers in a Pandemic: Investment Treaty Interpretation and the Customary Presumption of Reasonable Regulation
Oliver Hailes 233
11 Bilateral Investment Treaties, Investor Obligations and Customary International Environmental Law
Madhav Mallya 261
12 The Role of Customary International Law in International Investment Law Remedies: The Curious Case of Natural Resources
Filip Balcerzak 284
13 A TWAIL Engagement with Customary International Investment Law: Some Strategies for Interpretation
Nina Mileva 307
Part IV Concluding Thoughts: Custom and Its Interpretation in International Investment Law
14 Custom and Its Interpretation in International Investment Law: Final Musings
Panos Merkouris, Andreas Kulick, José Manuel ÁlvarezZarate, and Maciej Żenkiewicz 335
Bibliography 346
Index 374
CONTRIBUTORS
José Manuel Álvarez-Zarate is Professor at Externado University of Colombia and Director of the Law and Economics Department where he runs the IEL program. He holds a degree in Administrative Law and a Ph.D. He was a visiting scholar at American University Washington College of Law in 2016–2017; a visiting professor at Fundación Getulio Vargas, Río de Janeiro, Brazil, October–November in 2015; and a visiting research fellow at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, London, England in May–June, 2009. He has been teaching and practicing in the fields of IEL, economic administrative regulation, and dispute settlement for more than twenty-eight years and has been widely published. His legal experience includes consultancy for private and public entities in trade negotiations and international business, as well as acting before administrative courts, arbitration panels, the Andean Tribunal, and international arbitration.
Filip Balcerzak, LL.M., Ph.D., attorney at law is admitted to the bar in two jurisdictions: Poland (adwokat) and Spain (abogado). He specializes in commercial dispute resolution at both national and international levels. He has successfully led cases for a variety of clients from different jurisdictions, utilizing his fluency in English and Spanish.
His experience includes advising and representing parties in international arbitrations (e.g., in ad hoc arbitrations with their seat in New York and London). He is an arbitrator at the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce and the Lewiatan Court of Arbitration. He effectively combines professional and academic activities. He completed his LL.M. studies at the University of Ottawa, specializing in International Trade and Foreign Investment Law. Subsequently, he was granted a Ph.D. in public international law by Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (Ph.D. dissertation title: “Investor state arbitration and human rights,” written in English). Currently, he is an associate
ix list of contributors professor (research) at the Faculty of Law and Administration of the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan. He has authored numerous publications on international investment arbitration.
Patrick Dumberry is a full professor at the University of Ottawa (Civil Law Section). He holds a Ph.D. from the Graduate Institute for International Studies (Geneva). He practised international investment arbitration with law firms in Geneva (Lalive), Montreal (Norton Rose), as well as with Canada’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Trade Law Bureau). He is the author of more than ninety publications in the fields of international investment law and international law, including the following books: The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard: A Guide to NAFTA Case Law on Article 1105 (Wolters Kluwer, 2013); The Formation and Identification of Rules of Customary International Law in International Investment Law (Cambridge University Press 2016); A Guide to State Succession in International Investment Law (Elgar 2018); Fair and Equitable Treatment: Its Interaction with the Minimum Standard and Its Customary Status (Brill 2018); A Guide to General Principles of Law in International Investment Law (Oxford University Press 2020); Rebellions and Civil Wars: State Responsibility for the Conduct of Insurgents (Cambridge University Press 2021).
Saïda El Boudouhi is Professor of Public Law at the University of Paris 8 Vincennes Saint-Denis, and her specialties range from public international law, international economic law (investment and WTO law), the application of international law in domestic systems, and the law of international organizations. She earned her Ph.D. from the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne in 2009, completed her postdoctoral studies at the European University Institute, University of Florence, Italy, and was an invited researcher at the University of Arizona College of Law from 2019 to 2020.
Emmanuel Giakoumakis is an Associate Lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson LLP, where he focuses his practice on public international law, with an emphasis on international investment law and State-to-State adjudication. He is also a D.Phil. candidate at the University of Oxford, Faculty of Law. He was formerly an Associate Legal Officer at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where he advised the President of the Court on his judicial and presidential duties while also working on a wide range of international law disputes. Prior to that, he worked in different law firms as a legal advisor to governments and private corporations on various questions of public
x list of contributors
international law, including the law of treaties and State responsibility, investment arbitration, and international human rights law. He has held seminars at the Hague Academy of International Law (2019) and the Institut International de Droits de l’Homme (International Institute of Human Rights) (2018).
Horacio A Grigera Naón is Distinguished Practitioner-in-Residence and Director of the Center on International Commercial Arbitration at the Washington College of Law. He is a former secretary general of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce and a practitioner in the field for over thirty years.
Oliver Hailes is Assistant Professor of Law at the London School of Economics and Political Science, where he lectures public international law, international arbitration, international investment law, and transnational environmental law. He is Assistant General Editor of the ICSID Reports. Before arriving at the LSE, Oliver clerked for an appellate judge, practised commercial litigation, and held several research, teaching, and editorial roles. Recently, he was co-Editor-in-Chief of the Cambridge International Law Journal and a Research Associate with the PluriCourts Centre of Excellence at the University of Oslo.
Łukasz Kułaga is Associate Professor in the Division of International and European Law at the Faculty of Law and Administration of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw and a legal expert in the LegalTreaty Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland. Currently Dr. hab. Łukasz Kułaga works on the consequences of aggression against Ukraine for international law. His other fields of expertise are international investment law, the use of force, immunities, the law of treaties, and the law of State responsibility.
Andreas Kulick (Privatdozent, venia legendi et docendi, Tübingen; doctor iuris, Tübingen; LLM, NYU School of Law; First and Second State Exams, Berlin) is a senior research fellow at University of Tübingen, Germany. He is a visiting professor at the Albert Ludwigs University Freiburg in the winter semester of 2023–2024. He has been a visiting fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, NYU School of Law, and the WZB Berlin. His research focuses on public international law – in particular, on international dispute settlement, and on German and comparative constitutional law and theory. He has experience in advising and representing States in various
xi list of contributors matters of public international law before international courts and tribunals, including the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), and in ICSID proceedings, as well as before domestic courts. He is a member of the International Law Association (ILA) Study Group on Content and Evolution of the Rules of Interpretation in International Law. He is the author, inter alia, of Global Public Interest in International Investment Law (Cambridge University Press, 2012) and the editor of Reassertion of Control over the Investment Treaty Regime (Cambridge University Press, 2017), and has numerous publications in the area of public international law and beyond.
Sotirios-Ioannis Lekkas is a postdoctoral researcher for the of the TRICI-Law project (ERC grant agreement no 759728) at the Department of Transboundary Legal Studies of the University of Groningen. His research focuses on the content and evolution of rules of interpretation in international law. Prior to this position, Sotirios worked as a judicial fellow at the ICJ and as a tutor in public international law at the University of Oxford, Faculty of Law. He holds a D Phil in Law from the University of Oxford. He has studied law in Athens and London (University College London), where he was awarded the George Schwarzenberger Prize in International Law by the University of London. He is also a member of the Bar in Athens, Greece (non-practicing).
Madhav Mallya is Associate Professor at the Jindal Global Law School. He has also taught at National Law University, Delhi, India; Lloyd Law College and the School of Law, Uttar Pradesh, India; and Bennett University, Uttar Pradesh, India. He completed his BBA LLB from Symbiosis Law Schools, Pune, Maharashtra, India, in 2010 and LLM from McGill University, Montreal, Canada, in 2011. He was also a doctoral student at McGill University from 2014 to 2016 and an accomplished scholarship student at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, Waterloo, Canada, in 2016. His areas of research and teaching interest include international investment law and public international law.
Diego Mejía-Lemos, LLM, Ph.D., serves as a scholar and practitioner of international law and dispute resolution. He holds, among others, graduate degrees from New York University and the National University of Singapore (NUS). He has participated in the representation of States in proceedings before international courts, including while working as a juriste international at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer’s Paris Office.
list of contributors
Furthermore, he has provided support to arbitral tribunals conducting proceedings under the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s auspices. Recently, he has held a postdoctoral fellowship at NUS and has been appointed as a distinguished research associate professor within the Xi’an Jiaotong University’s ‘Young Talent’ program.
Panos Merkouris is Professor of International Law at the University of Groningen. His five-year project on The Rules of Interpretation of Customary International Law was awarded an ERC Starting Grant (ERC grant agreement no 759728). He specialises in Interpretation, Law of Treaties, Sources of International Law, and Dispute Settlement. Professor Merkouris is currently a member of the editorial boards of the Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (NYIL), the Leiden Journal of International Law (LJIL), and the International Community Law Review (ICLR). He was also the co-rapporteur of the ILA Study Group on the Content and Evolution of Rules of Interpretation in International Law. He is the author of the monograph Treaties in Motion (CUP 2020, coauthored with Professor Fitzmaurice), Article 31(3)(c) of the VCLT, and the Principle of Systemic Integration: Normative Shadows in Plato’s Cave (Martinus Nijhoff 2015). The latter has been cited with approval by a Chamber of the International Criminal Court. He has numerous publications on interpretation, law of treaties, and customary international law.
Nina Mileva is a PhD researcher of the TRICI-Law project (ERC grant agreement no 759728) and a lecturer at the Department of Transboundary Legal Studies of the University of Groningen. Her research focuses on the interpretation of customary international law, and in particular, the development of a theory of interpretation of customary international law. Her research interests relate to the role of international law in the practice of domestic courts, the relationship between international and domestic law, international legal theory, and critical approaches to international law.
Federica I Paddeu is a Derek Bowett Fellow in Law, Queens’ College, and Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International both at the University of Cambridge. Her work has been published in leading international law journals, including the British Yearbook of International Law, the European Journal of International Law, and the American Journal of International Law. A monograph based on her PhD dissertation “Justification and Excuse in International Law: Concept and Theory of General Defences,” was published by CUP in 2018. She is a member of
list of contributors
Blackstone Chambers Academic Research Panel and admitted to practice in Venezuela, as a member of the Caracas (Distrito Federal) Bar.
Konrad Turnbull is a PhD researcher within the Department of Transboundary Legal Studies and Faculty of Economics & Business at the University of Groningen. Whilst his core research focuses on international courts’ approaches in adjudicating cases of structural discrimination and the public’s perception of the efficacy of these institutions, his research interests also include international investment law and the international leasing of public powers. He holds an LLB & LLM in International Human Rights from the University of Groningen, an LLM in International Comparative Law from The George Washington University Law School, and a BS in Digital Filmmaking from Shepherd University.
Anna Ventouratou is a DPhil candidate and tutor in Public International Law. Her thesis explores the availability of the defenses codified in Part I, Chapter V of the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts in international adjudication. She focuses on disputes before the ICJ, the WTO Dispute Settlement System, and Investment Arbitration. Her doctoral studies are supervised by Professor Catherine Redgwell, Chichele Professor of Public International Law at All Souls College, and Professor Miles Jackson, Associate Professor of Law at Jesus College. Anna has studied law at the University of Athens (LLB; LLM in Public International Law (dist)) and the University of Oxford (MJur (dist); MPhil). Her studies in Oxford have been supported by the University of Athens “A Gazis” Trust, the Peter Carter Graduate Scholarship in Law (Oxford Faculty of Law and Wadham College), and the Academy of Athens.
Maciej Żenkiewicz is Assistant Professor of Public International Law at Nicolaus Copernicus Univeristy (Toruń, Poland) and a visiting professor at Faculty of Social Sciences of the Antonio de Nebrija University. He is an author of various articles and monographs: his latest publication (with contribution as the editor and author) is the book International Investment Law published in Spanish. He is a member of various forums, eg, SIEL or ISDS Academic Forum.
FOREWORD: CUSTOM AND INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW
In international investment law, as in other fields of international law, the interaction between treaty practice (including their interpretation and application) and customary rules of international law has become a fertile ground for doctrinal discussion. Two issues related to this discussion are particularly worth mentioning at the outset of this volume on Custom and International Investment Law.
The first question is whether and how a large number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) may contribute to the formation or declaration of customary rules of law related to the content of these treaties. In other words, the question may be framed as to whether the substantive protections recognized in a fairly similar manner in large numbers of BITs is an expression of a customary rule with the same content. Several international judgments have so far confirmed that a multilateral treaty may declare the content of a rule of international customary law. For example, many international investment arbitration tribunals have upheld the declaratory nature of customary rules contained in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, such as Articles 31 to 33 about treaty interpretation. In contrast, no international tribunal (different from investment arbitration tribunals), United Nations General Assembly resolution, or any other equally authoritative body so far has conclusively affirmed that the substantive provisions of BITs declare the content of customary rules of international law. In sum, the uncertainty remains about the customary nature of the rules included in BITs and their arbitral interpretations.
A second question refers to the application by international investment arbitration tribunals of customary international law that is recognized independently from the BITs. The extensive discussions by arbitral tribunals, government officials, and scholars about the scope of the minimum standard of treatment and the fair and equitable treatment standard in regard to different states and treaties are an example of the complexities involved in articulating this relationship between treaty and customary
foreword: custom and international investment law
rules of international law. Some may even say that a state that systematically invokes a certain historic jurisprudence to prove the content of a customary rule is a persistent objector against the formation of new and more advanced customary rules on that matter.
The discussion about the existence of customary rules of international investment law may also be approached from the perspective of the effectiveness of those rules. This effectiveness depends to a large extent on the availability of an enforceable, international judicial remedy. States, of course, have the upper hand by modifying the judicial means of dispute settlement through new treaties, in application of the well-established principle of lex posterior derogat priori. Depending on how states modify the dispute settlement system, they will influence the interpretation and application of the substantive rules on international investment protection, even regardless of whether these can be classified as strictly of treaty or customary nature.
In conclusion, customary and treaty rules of international investment law develop in a simultaneous and potentially interrelated manner. Together, these sources form a dynamic body of rules that develop in the shadow of the states’ powers and preferences in changing times. I congratulate the authors and editors of this volume for pointing to specific examples, case studies, and related legal developments that frame the broader discussion on how States want to treat foreign investments.
Washington, D.C., January 27, 2022
Horacio A Grigera Naón Independent International Arbitrator Director of the Center on International Commercial Arbitration American University Washington College of Law
TABLE OF CASES
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v Turkey) (Jurisdiction) [1978] ICJ Rep 3, 105
• Separate Opinion of Judge de Castro, 114
Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v Congo) (Compensation) [2012] ICJ Rep 324, 73
• Declaration of Judge Greenwood, 210
Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v Congo) (Merits) [2010] ICJ Rep 639, 73
Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v Congo) (Preliminary Objections) [2007] ICJ Rep 582, 37
Ambatielos (Greece v UK) (Preliminary Objection) [1952] ICJ Rep 28, 220
Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council under Article II, Section 2, of the 1944 International Air Services Transit Agreement (Bahrain, Egypt and United Arab Emirates v Qatar) (Judgment) [2020] ICJ Rep 172, 145
Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council under Article 84 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates v Qatar) (Judgment) [2020] ICJ Rep 81, 145
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro) (Judgment) [2007] ICJ Rep 43, 108, 117, 179, 181, 220
Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v Russian Federation) (Preliminary Objections) [2011] ICJ Rep 70, 112, 140
Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989 (Guinea-Bissau v Senegal) [1991] ICJ Rep 53, 105
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Congo v Uganda) (Counter-Claims, Order of 29 November 2001) [2001] ICJ Rep 678, 148
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Congo v Uganda) (Judgment) [2005] ICJ Rep 168, 73
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Congo v Uganda) (Order of 8 September 2020) [2020] ICJ Rep 264, 208
• Opinion of Judge Sebutinde, 208
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Congo v Uganda) (Reparations) [2022]
ICJ Rep 1, 182
xvi
xvii table of cases
• Separate Opinion of Judge Iwasawa, 189
• Separate Opinion of Judge Yusuf, 199
Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Congo v Belgium) (Judgment) [2002] ICJ Rep 3, 148, 286, 313
Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v USA) (Judgment) [2004] ICJ Rep 12, 73, 286
Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co, Ltd (Belgium v Spain) (Judgment) [1970] ICJ Rep, 9
• Separate Opinion of Judge Ammoun, 187
Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Compensation) [2018] ICJ Rep 15, 73
Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Judgment) [2018] ICJ Rep 15, 179
Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission of a State to the United Nations (Advisory Opinion) [1950] ICJ Rep 4, 108
Continental Shelf (Libya/Malta) (Merits) [1985] ICJ Rep 13, 202
Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libya) (Merits) [1982] ICJ Rep 18, 187
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v Albania) (Merits) [1949] ICJ Rep 4, 140
Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (USA v Iran) (Judgment) [1980] ICJ Rep 3, 181
Dispute Regarding Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Judgment) [2009] ICJ Rep 213, 140, 220, 221, 240, 243
Elettronica Sicula SpA (ELSI) (USA v Italy) (Judgment) [1989] ICJ Rep 15, 9, 138, 254, 318, 319
Fisheries Jurisdiction (Spain v Canada) (Jurisdiction) (Judgment) [1998] ICJ Rep 432, 246
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali) [1986] ICJ Rep 554, 187
Interpretation of Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania (Second Phase) (Advisory Opinion) [1950] ICJ Rep 221, 200
Jadhav (India v Pakistan) (Judgment) [2019] ICJ Rep 418, 141
Judgments of the Administrative Tribunal of ILO Upon Complaint Made Against UNESCO (Advisory Opinion) [1956] ICJ Rep 77, 182
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy) (Counter-Claim, Order of 6 July 2010) [2010] ICJ Rep 310, 148
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece intervening) (Judgment) [2012] ICJ Rep 99, 52
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (Advisory Opinion) [2004] ICJ Rep 136, 179, 286
Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (Advisory Opinion) [2019] ICJ Rep 95, 118
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep 226, 249
xviii table of cases
Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions (Qatar v Bahrain) (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) [1994] ICJ Rep 112, 105
Maritime Delimitation in the Area Between Greenland and Jan Mayen (Judgment) [1993] ICJ Rep 38
• Separate Opinion of Judge Weeramantry, 186
Maritime Delimitation in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Order of 31 May 2016) [2016] ICJ Rep 235, 44
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v USA) (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 16, 107, 181, 239, 249, 270
Monetary Gold Removed from Rome in 1943 (Preliminary Question) [1954] ICJ Rep 19, 125
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands; Federal Republic of Germany/Denmark) (Judgment) [1969] ICJ Rep 3, 186, 192, 202, 211
• Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, 312
• Dissenting Opinion of Vice-President Koretsky, 186
Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v France) (Judgment) [1974] ICJ Rep 253, 146, 271
Oil Platforms (Iran v USA) (Counter-Claim, Order of 10 March 1998) [1998] ICJ Rep 203, 148
Oil Platforms (Iran v USA) (Merits) [2003] ICJ Rep 161
• Declaration of Judge Koroma, 149
• Dissenting Opinion of Judge Al-Khasawneh, 149
• Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins, 148
Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay) (Judgment) [2010] ICJ Rep 14, 220, 272, 313
Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court’s Judgment of 20th December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v France) [1995] ICJ Rep 288
• Dissenting opinion by Judge ad hoc Sir Geoffrey Palmer, 271
• Dissenting opinion by Judge Weeramantry, 271
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v India) (Judgment) [1960] ICJ Rep 6, 34
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v India) (Observations and submissions of the Government of the Portuguese Republic on the Preliminary Objections of the Government of India) [1957] VIII ICJ Rep 629, 28
Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco (France v USA) (Judgment) [1952] ICJ Rep 176, 33
South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v South Africa; Liberia v South Africa) (Preliminary Objection) [1962] ICJ Rep 319, 108
South West Africa Cases (Second Phase) (Ethiopia v South Africa; Liberia v South Africa) (Judgment) [1966] ICJ Rep 6, 201
• Pleadings, South West Africa, Vol XI, 34
Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v Colombia) (Judgment) [2012] ICJ Rep 624, 239
Tulip v Turkey (Award of 10 March 2014) ICSID Case No ARB/11/28, 109
xix table of cases
Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ)
Case Concerning the Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (Jurisdiction) [1927] PCIJ
Rep Series A No 9, 146, 203
Case Concerning the Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (Merits) [1928] PCIJ
Series A No 17, 72, 179, 285
Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (Claim for Indemnity, The Merits) [1928] PCIJ
Series A No 17, 87
Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex (France/Switzerland) (Order) [1929]
PCIJ Ser A No 22, 112
German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia (Germany v Poland) (Merits) [1926] PCIJ Series A No 7, 80
Oscar Chinn Case (Britain v Belgium) (Judgment) [1934] PCIJ Series A/B No 63, 239
SS ‘Lotus’ (France v Turkey) (Judgment) [1927] PCIJ Series A No 10, 35
SS ‘Wimbledon’ (UK & ors v Germany) (Judgment) [1923] PCIJ Series A No 1, 238
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)
Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with Respect to Activities in the Area (Advisory Opinion of 1 February 2011) 2011
ITLOS Rep 10, 220
Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases (New Zealand v Japan; Australia v Japan) (Provisional Measures, Order of 27 August 1999) 1999 ITLOS Rep 280
• Separate Opinion of Judge Laing, 268, 271
• Separate Opinion of Judge Treves, 271
The M/V ‘Saiga’ (No 2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v Guinea) (Judgment) [1999]
120 ITLOS Rep 10, 286
Arbitration
9REN v Spain (Award of 31 May 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/15/15, 304
AAPL v Sri Lanka (Final Award of 27 June 1990) ICSID Case No ARB/87/3, 83, 206
Achmea (I) v Slovakia (Award of 7 December 2012) UNCITRAL, PCA Case No 2008–13, 106, 209
Achmea (I) v Slovakia (Award on Jurisdiction, Arbitrability and Suspension of 26 October 2010) PCA Case No 2008–13, 214
Adamakopoulos & ors v Cyprus (Statement of Dissent of Professor Marcelo Kohen of 3 February 2020) ICSID Case No ARB/15/49, 226
ADC Affiliate Limited v Hungary (Award of 2 October 2006) ICSID Case No ARB/03/16, 73, 80, 84–6, 88, 210, 286
Addiko Bank v Croatia (Decision on Croatia’s Jurisdictional Objection Related to the Alleged Incompatibility of the BIT with the EU Acquis of 12 June 2020) ICSID Case No ARB/17/37, 223, 224
xx table of cases
Adem Dogan v Turkmenistan (Decision on Annulment of 15 January 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/09/9, 188
ADF Group Inc v USA (Award of 9 January 2003) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/00/, 101
ADF Group Inc v USA (Canada’s Second Article 1128 Submission of 19 July 2002) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/00/1, 318
ADF Group Inc v USA (Final Post-Hearing Submission of Respondent United States of America on Article 1105(1) and Pope & Talbot of 1 August 2002) Case No ARB(AF)/00/1, 56
ADF Group Inc v USA (Post-Hearing Submission of Respondent United States of America on Article 1105(1) and Pope & Talbot of 27 June 2002) Case No ARB(AF)/00/1, 59
ADF Group Inc v USA (Transcript of Hearing: Day 2 of 16 April 2002) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/00/1, 318
ADM v Mexico (Award of 21 November 2007) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/04/05, 102, 126
ADM v Mexico (Concurring Opinion of Arthur W Rovine of 20 September 2007) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/04/05, 132
ADM v Mexico (Decision on Request for Correction, Supplementary Decision, and Interpretation of 10 July 2008) ICSID Case No ARB(AF) 04/05, 205
Adriano Gardella SpA v Côte d’Ivoire (Award of 29 August 1997) ICSID Case No
ARB/74/1, 82
A11Y v Czech Republic (Decision on Jurisdiction 9 February 2017) ICSID Case No
UNCT/15/1, 215
AES Summit Generation Limited and AES–Tisza Erömü Kft v Hungary (Award of 23 September 2010) ICSID Case No ARB/07/22, 243
AGIP SpA v Congo (Award of 30 November 1979) ICSID Case No ARB/77/1, 82
AIG Capital Partners, Inc and CJSC Tema Real Estate Company Ltd v Kazakhstan (Award of 7 October 2003) ICSID Case No ARB/01/6, 197
Al Tamimi v Oman (Award of 3 November 2015) ICSID Case No ARB/11/33, 96, 245
Alabama Claims of USA v UK (Ad hoc Award of 14 September 1872) published in JB Moore (ed), History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, Vol 1 (US GPO 1898), 79
Al-Bahloul v Tajikistan (Final Award of 8 June 2010) SCC Case No V (064/2008), 101, 289, 302, 303
Alghanim v Jordan (Award of 14 December 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/13/38, 110
Almås v Poland (Award of 27 June 2016) PCA Case No 2015–13, 108
Amco Asia Corporation & ors v Indonesia (Award of 20 November 1984) ICSID Case No ARB/81/1, 82
Amco Asia Corporation & ors v Indonesia (Decision on Annulment of 16 May 1986)
ICSID Case No ARB/81/1, 183
Amco v Indonesia (Award of 31 May 1990) ICSID Case No ARB/81/8, 297
xxi table of cases
American International Group, Inc v Iran (Award of 7 December 1983) IUSCT Case No 2, 4 IUSCTR 96, 185
American Manufacturing & Trading, Inc v Republic of Zaire (Award of 21 February 1997) ICSID Case No ARB/93/1, 82, 182
AMF Aircraftleasing Meier & Fischer GmbH & Co KG, Hamburg (Germany) v Czech Republic (Final Award of 11 May 2020) PCA Case No 2017–15, 241
Amoco International Finance Corp v Iran (Partial Award of 14 July 1987) IUSCT Case No 56, 83 ILR 500, 83, 185
Amoco v Iran (Partial Award (Award No 310-56-3) of 14 July 1987) IUSCT Case No 56, 15 IUSCT 189, 286
Anglia v Czech Republic (Final Award of 10 March 2017) SCC Case No 2014/181, 215
Antin v Spain (Award of 15 June 2018) ICSID Case No ARB/13/31, 290
Ares v Georgia (Award of 26 February 2008) ICSID Case No ARB/05/23, 103
Arif v Moldova (Award of 8 April 2013) ICSID Case No ARB/11/23, 16, 287
Armas v Venezuela (Final Award of 26 April 2019) PCA Case No 2013–3, 107
Asian Agricultural Products Ltd v Republic of Sri Lanka (Final Award of 27 June 1990) ICSID Case No ARB/87/3, 245
Atlantic Triton Company Limited v Guinea (Award of 21 April 1986) ICSID Case No ARB/84/1, 187
Attaque de la caravane du maharao de Cutch (1927) II RIAA 821, 190
Award in Arbitration Regarding the Iron Rhine Railway Between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands (Decision of 24 May 2005) XXVII UNRIAA 35, 220
Awdi v Romania (Award of 2 March 2015) ICSID Case No ARB/10/13, 107
AWG Group v Argentina (Award of 9 April 2015) UNCITRAL, 85
AWG Group v Argentina (Decision on Liability of 30 July 2010) UNCITRAL, 112
• Separate Opinion of Arbitrator Pedro Nikken, 12
Azinian v Mexico (Award of 1 November 1999) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/97/2, 320
Bahgat v Arab Republic of Egypt (Final Award of 23 December 2019) PCA Case No 2012–07, 244
Bayindir v Pakistan (Award of 27 August 2009) ICSID Case No ARB/03/29, 117
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Peru (Award of 30 November 2017) ICSID Case No
ARB/14/21, 275, 302
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Peru (Partial Dissenting Opinion of Professor Philippe Sands of 30 November 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/14/21, 275
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Peru (Submission of Canada pursuant to Article 832 of the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement of 9 June 2016) ICSID Case No
ARB/14/21, 55
Bernardus Henricus Funnekotter v Zimbabwe (Award of 22 April 2009) ICSID Case No
ARB/05/6, 152
BG Group v Argentina (Final Award of 24 December 2007) UNCITRAL, 153, 299
xxii table of cases
Biedermann v Kazakhstan (Award of 1 January 1999) SCC Case No 97/1996, 82
Biens britanniques au Maroc espagnol (Spain v GB) (1925) II RIAA 615, 191
Bilcon v Canada (Award on Jurisdiction and Liability of 17 March 2015) PCA Case No 2009–04, 274, 322
Bilcon v Canada (Decision on Damages of 10 January 2019) PCA Case No 2009–04, 101
Binder v Czech Republic (Award on Jurisdiction of 6 June 2007) UNCITRAL, 215
Bischoff Case (1903) 10 RIAA, 252
Biwater Gauff v Tanzania (Award of 24 July 2008) ICSID Case No ARB/05/22, 104, 286
Bosh v Ukraine (Award of 25 October 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/08/11, 107
Brewer, Moller & Co Case (Germany v Venezuela) (1903) 10 RIAA 423, 243
British Caribbean Bank v Belize (Award of 19 December 2014) PCA Case No 2010–18, 85
Burlington Resources Inc v Ecuador (Decision on Reconsideration and Award of 7 February 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/08/05, 85
Busta v Czech Republic (Final Award of 10 March 2017) SCC Case No 2015/01, 215
Campbell (1931) II RIAA 1145, 190
Camuzzi International SA v Argentina (Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction of 11 May 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/03/2, 57
Camuzzi International SA v Argentina (Opinion of Anne-Marie Slaughter and William Burke-White of 19 July 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/03/02, 39
Camuzzi International SA v Argentina (Opinion of José E Alvarez of 12 September 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/03/02, 39
Canadian Cattlemen v USA (Award on Jurisdiction of 28 January 2008) UNCITRAL, 222
Canfor Corporation v USA and Tembec et al v USA and Terminal Forest Products Ltd v USA (Order of the Consolidation Tribunal of 7 September 2005) UNCITRAL, 220
Caratube v Kazakhstan (Award of 27 September 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/13/13, 302
Cargill, Inc v Mexico (Award of 18 September 2009) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/05/02, 5
Casinos Austria v Argentina (Decision on Jurisdiction of 29 June 2018) ICSID Case No ARB/14/32, 107
Cengiz v Libya (Final Award of 7 November 2018) ICC Case No 21537/ZF/AYZ, 107
Chemin de fer de Sopron-Köszeg contre Autriche et Hongrie (1929) II RIAA 961, 198
Chemtura Corporation (formerly Crompton Corporation) v Canada (Award of 2 August 2010) UNCITRAL, 241
Chevron Corporation and Texaco Petroleum Corporation v Ecuador (Award of 31 August 2011) UNCITRAL, PCA Case No 34877, 26
Chevron Corporation and Texaco Petroleum Corporation v Ecuador (II) (Opinion of Jan Paulsson of 12 March 2012) PCA Case No 2009–23, 43
Claimant v Slovakia (Award of 5 March 2011) ad hoc Arbitration, 106
CME Czech Republic BV v Czech Republic (Final Award of 14 March 2003) UNCITRAL, 42
CME Czech Republic BV v Czech Republic (Partial Award of 13 September 2001) UNCITRAL, 287
xxiii table of cases
CME Czech Republic BV v Czech Republic (Separate Opinion on the Issues at the Quantum Phase by Ian Brownlie of 14 March 2003) UNCITRAL, 198
CMS v Argentina (Annulment of 25 September 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/01/8, 101, 157
CMS v Argentina (Application for Annulment and Request for Stay of Enforcement of Arbitral Award of 8 September 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/01/8, 55
CMS v Argentina (Award of 12 May 2005) ICSID Case ARB/01/8 [390], 156
Colt Industries Operating Corporation v Republic of Korea (Order Taking Note of the Discontinuance of 3 August 1990) ICSID Case No ARB/84/2, 82
Compagnie de la Baie d’Hudson (1869) published in in Politis, N & de Lapradelle, AG (eds), Recueil Des Arbitrages Internationaux (1856–1872) (Pedone 1923), 191
Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija SA and Vivendi Universal SA v Argentina (Final Award of 20 August 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/97/3, 16, 80
Compañia del Desarrollo de Santa Elena SA v Costa Rica (Award of 17 February 2000)
ICSID Case No ARB/96/1, 185
Company General of the Orinoco (1905) 10 RIAA 184, 157
ConocoPhillips v Venezuela (Award of 8 March 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/07/30, 74, 180
ConocoPhillips v Venezuela (Decision on Jurisdiction and Merits of 3 September 2013)
ICSID Case No ARB/07/30, 101, 295
Continental Casualty v Argentina (Award of 5 September 2008) ICSID Case No
ARB/03/9, 257
Continental Casualty v Argentina (Decision on the Application for Partial Annulment, and the Application for Partial Annulment of 16 September 2011) ICSID Case No
ARB/03/9, 104
Corn Products v Mexico (Decision on Responsibility of 15 January 2008) ICSID Case No
ARB/(AF)/04/1, 126
Cotesworth & Powell (Great Britain) v Colombia (Award of November 1875) published in JB Moore (ed), History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, Vol 2 (US GPO 1898), 79
Crystallex International Corporation v Venezuela (Award of 4 April 2016) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/11/2, 16, 85, 180
Cube v Spain (Decision on Jurisdiction, Liability and Partial Decision on Quantum of 19 February 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/15/20, 290
David Aven v Costa Rica (Final Award of 18 September 2018) ICSID Case No
UNCT/15/3, 262
Delagoa Bay Railway (1900) published in JB Moore (ed), History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, vol 2 (US GPO 1898) 1865, 78
Desert Line v Yemen (Award of 6 February 2008) ICSID Case No ARB/05/17, 102
Deutsche Amerikanische Petroleum Gesellschaft Oil Tankers (1926) 2 RIAA 777, 240
Deutsche Bank AG v Sri Lanka (Award of 31 October 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/09/02, 244
Devas v India (Decision on Jurisdiction and Merits of 25 July 2016) PCA Case No 2013–09, 111
xxiv table of cases
USA (Dickson Car Wheel Company) v Mexico (1931) 4 RIAA 669, 240
Eastern Sugar BV (Netherlands) v Czech Republic (Partial Award of 27 March 2007)
SCC Case No 88/2004, 215
Eco Oro Minerals Corp v Colombia (Decision on Jurisdiction, Liability and Directions on Quantum of 9 September 2021) ICSID Case No ARB/16/41, 249, 322, 340
Ecuador v USA (Expert Opinion of Prof Alain Pellet of 23 May 2012) PCA Case No 2012–5, 44
EDF (Services) Ltd v Romania (Award of 8 October 2009) ICSID Case No ARB/05/ 13, 342
EDF v Argentina (Award of 11 June 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/03/23, 102, 159, 197
EDF v Argentina (Decision on Annulment of 5 February 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/03/23, 104, 159
Eiser v Spain (Final Award of 4 May 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/13/36, 290
El Paso Energy International Company v Argentina (Award of 31 October 2011) ICSID Case No ARB/03/15, 15, 102, 222, 246, 296
El Paso Energy International Company v Argentina (Decision on Annulment of 22 September 2014) ICSID Case No ARB/03/15, 109
Electrabel v Hungary (Decision on Jurisdiction and Liability of 30 November 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/07/19, 102, 213
Eli Lilly and Company v Canada (Observations on Issues Raised in 1128 Submissions of the United States and Mexico of 22 April 2016), 57
Eli Lilly and Company v Canada (Observations on Issues Raised in 1128 Submissions of the United States and Mexico of 22 April 2016) Case No UNCT/14/2, 55
EnCana v Ecuador (Award of 3 February 2006) UNCITRAL, LCIA Case No UN3481, 101
Enkev v Poland (First Partial Award of 29 April 2014) PCA Case No 2013–01, 293
Enron v Argentina (Award of 22 May 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/01/3, 157, 224
Enron v Argentina (Decision on Annulment of 30 July 2010) ICSID Case No ARB/01/3, 113
Enron v Argentina (Decision on Jurisdiction of 14 January 2004) ICSID Case No ARB/01/3, 157, 224, 289
Eskosol v Italy (Decision on Termination Request and Intra-EU Objection of 7 May 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/15/50, 222
Europe Cement v Turkey (Award of 13 August 2009) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/07/2, 293
European American Investment Bank AG (Austria) v Slovakia (Award on Jurisdiction of 22 October 2012) UNCITRAL, PCA Case No 2010–17, 215
Fedax NV v Venezuela (Award of 9 March 1998) ICSID Case No ARB/96/3, 82
Feldman v Mexico (Award of 16 December 2002) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/99/1, 241
Foresight v Spain (Final Award of 14 November 2018) SCC Case No 2015/150, 288
France (Affaire Chevreau) v UK (Award of 9 June 1931) 2 RIAA 1113, 317
France (Feuillebois) v Mexico (1929) V RIAA 542, 198
Furst Claim (1960) 42 ILR 153, 240
F-W v Trinidad and Tobago (Award of 3 March 2006) ICSID Case No ARB/01/14, 100
xxv table of cases
Gabon v Société Serete SA (Order Taking Note of the Discontinuance Issued by the Tribunal of 27 Feb 1978) ICSID Case No ARB/76/1, 82
Gavrilović v Croatia (Award of 26 July 2018) ICSID Case No ARB/12/39, 108
Gemplus v Mexico (Award of 16 June 2010) ICSID Cases Nos ARB(AF)/04/3 & ARB(AF)/04/4, 102
Genin, Eastern Credit Limited, Inc and AS Baltoil v Estonia (Award of 25 June 2001)
ICSID Case No ARB/99/2, 259
Georges Pinson case (France/United Mexican States) (Award of 13 April 1928) 5
UNRIAA 329, 138
Glamis Gold, Ltd v United States (Award of 8 June 2009) UNCITRAL, 5, 245
Glamis Gold, Ltd v United States (Decision on Application and Submission by Quechan Indian Nation of 16 September 2005) UNCITRAL, 330
Gold Reserve Inc v Venezuela (Award of 22 September 2014) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/09/1, 16, 85, 182, 304
Gold Reserve Inc v Venezuela (Venezuela’s Motion to Dismiss Petition and to Deny Recognition of Arbitral Award, or in the Alternative, to Stay Enforcement of 12 June 2015) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/09/1, 184
GPF GP Sàrl v Poland (Award on Jurisdiction (Not Public) of 15 February 2017) SCC Case No V 2014/168, 215
GPF GP Sàrl v Poland (Final Award of 29 April 2020) SCC Case No 2014/168, 217
Green Power Partners & SCE Solar v Spain (Award of 16 June 2022) SCC Case No V2016/13, 225
Greentech Energy Systems A/S, NovEnergia II Energy & Environment (SCA) SICAR, and NovEnergia II Italian Portfolio SA v Italy (Final Award of 23 December 2018) SCC Case No V 2015/095, 251
Guadalupe Gas Products Corporation v Nigeria (Award of 22 July 1980) ICSID Case No ARB/78/1, 82
Hamester v Ghana (Award of 18 June 2010) ICSID Case No ARB/07/24, 102
Harington et autres (1862) published in N Politis & AG de Lapradelle (eds), Recueil Des Arbitrages Internationaux (1856–1872) (Pedone 1923), 191
Heny (1903) IX RIAA 125, 191
Himpurna California Energy Ltd (Bermuda) v PT (Persero) Perusahaan Listruik Negara (Indonesia) (Final Award of 4 May 1999) XXV YBCA 14, 196
Holiday Inns SA & ors v Morocco (Order Taking Note of the Discontinuance 17 October 1978) ICSID Case No ARB/72/1, 82
Houben v Burundi (Award 12 January 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/13/7, 73
Hrvatska Elektropriveda v Slovenia (Award of 17 December 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/05/24, 112
Hulley Enterprises v Russia (Final Award of 18 July 2014) PCA Case No AA 226, 298
Impregilo v Argentina (Award of 21 June 2011) ICSID Case No ARB/07/17, 113, 208
Industria Nacional de Alimentos (Luccetti) v Perú (Decision on Annulment of 5 September 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/03/4, 115
xxvi table of cases
Infinito Gold v Costa Rica (Decision on Jurisdiction of 4 December 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/14/5, 107
Infrared v Spain (Award of 2 August 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/14/12, 299
Inmaris v Ukraine (Award of 1 March 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/08/8, 114
Innogy v Spain (Decision on Jurisdiction, Liability and Certain Issues of Quantum of 30 December 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/14/34, 107
Invesmart, BV v Czech Republic (Award of 26 June 2009) UNCITRAL, 243
Islamic Republic of Iran v USA (Award of 2 July 2014) IUSCT Case Nos A15(IV) and A24, 182
Island of Palmas case (Netherlands v USA) (1928) 2 RIAA 829, 239
Jan de Nul v Egypt (Decision on Jurisdiction of 16 June 2006) ICSID Case No ARB/04/13, 26, 102, 103
John Gill (1931) V RIAA 157, 191
JSW Solar & Wirtgen v Czech Republic (Final Award of 11 October 2017) PCA Case No 2014–03, 215
Junghans (Germany v Romania) (Part Two) (1940) III RIAA 1883, 198
Juvel & Bithell v Poland (Partial Final Award 26 February 2019) ICC Case No 19459/ MHM, 215
Kaiser Bauxite Company v Jamaica (Decision on Jurisdiction and Competence of 6 July 1975) ICSID Case No ARB/74/3, 82
Kardassopoulos v Georgia (Award of 3 March 2010) ICSID Case No ARB/05/18, 296
Kardassopoulos v Georgia (Decision on Jurisdiction of 6 July 2007) ICSID Case No
ARB/05/18, 107
Karkey Karadeniz Elektrik Uretim AS v Islamic Republic of Pakistan (Award of 22 August 2017) ICSID Case No ARB/13/1, 244
Khan Resources v Mongolia (Award on the Merits of 2 March 2015) UNCITRAL, 294
Klöckner Industrie-Anlagen GmbH & ors v Cameroon & Société Camerounaise des Engrais (Ad hoc Committee Decision on Annulment of 3 May 1985) ICSID Case No ARB/81/2, 205
Klöckner Industrie-Anlagen GmbH & ors v Cameroon & Société Camerounaise des Engrais (Award of 21 October 1983) ICSID Case No ARB/81/2, 82
Kügele v Polish State (1932) 6 ILR 69, 240
Kuwait v American Independent Oil Company (Award of 24 March 1982) Ad Hoc Arbitration, 66 ILR 518, 183
Landesbank Baden-Würtemberg & ors v Spain (Decision on the Intra-EU Jurisdictional Objection of 25 February 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/15/45, 125, 213
Larsen v Hawaiian Kingdom (Award of 5 February 2001) UNCITRAL, 119 ILR 566, 125
Lemire v Ukraine (Award of 28 March 2011) ICSID Case No ARB/06/18, 208, 298
Les Laboratoires Servier, SAS, Biofarma, SAS and Arts et Techniques du Progres SAS v Republic of Poland (Final Award of 14 February 2012) UNCITRAL, 244
LESI v Algeria (Award of 10 January 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/03/08, 106
LETCO v Liberia (Award of 31 March 1986) ICSID Case No ARB/83/2, 82
Levi v Peru (Award of 26 February 2014) ICSID Case No ARB/10/17, 107
xxvii table of cases
LG&E v Argentina (Award of 25 July 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/02/1, 162, 286
LG&E v Argentina (Decision on Liability of 3 October 2006) ICSID Case No ARB/02/1, 111
Libyan American Oil Company v Libya (Award of 12 April 1977) Ad Hoc Tribunal, 62 ILR 140, 186
Loan Agreement Between Italy and Costa Rica (1998) XXV RIAA 21, 182
Loewen Group, Inc and Raymond L Loewen v USA (Award of 26 June 2003) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/98/3, 26, 110, 320
Loewen Group, Inc and Raymond L Loewen v USA (Opinion of Richard B Bilder (on international law governing state responsibility for treatment of foreign investors) of 16 March 2001) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/98/3, 35
Loewen Group, Inc and Raymond L Loewen v USA (Second Submission of the Government of Canada Pursuant to NAFTA Article 1128 of 27 June 2002) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/98/3, 56
Loewen Group, Inc and Raymond L Loewen v USA (Second Submission of the United Mexican States of 9 November 2001) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/98/3, 58
Lone Pine Resources Inc v Canada (Gouvernement du Canada Contre-Mémoire of 24 July 2015) ICSID Case No UNCT/15/2, 241
Lone Pine Resources Inc v Canada (Observations of the Government of Canada on the Issues Raised in the Memorials Submitted by the United States of America and Mexico by Virtue of NAFTA Article 1128 of 22 September 2017) Case No UNCT/15/2, 57
Maffezini v Spain (Award of 13 November 2000) ICSID Case No ARB/97/7, 82
Maffezini v Spain (Decision on Jurisdiction of 25 January 2000) ICSID Case No
ARB/97/7, 117
Magyar Farming v Hungary (Award of 13 November 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/17/27, 215
Mamidoil Jetoil Greek Petroleum Products Societe Anonyme SA v Albania (Award of 30 March 2015) ICSID Case No ARB/11/24, 259
Marfin v Cyprus (Award of 26 July 2018) ICSID Case No ARB/13/27, 215, 241
Masdar Solar v Spain (Award of 16 May 2018) ICSID Case No ARB/14/1, 74, 103, 213, 251, 290
MCI Power Group LC and New Turbine, Inc v Ecuador (Award of 31 July 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/03/6, 16, 56
Mercer International Inc v Canada (Submission of the United States of America of 8 May 2015) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/12/3, 56
Merrill & Ring v Canada (Award of 31 March 2010) ICSID Administered Case No UNCT/07/1, 101
Mesa Power Group LLC v Canada (Observations on the Award on Jurisdiction and Merits in William Ralph Clayton, William Richard Clayton, Douglas Clayton, Daniel Clayton and Bilcon of Delaware, Inc v Canada of 14 May 2015) PCA Case No 2012–17, 56
Mesa Power Group LLC v Canada (Response to 1128 Submissions of 26 June 2015) PCA Case No 2012–17, 55
xxviii table of cases
Metalclad v Mexico (Award of 30 August 2000) ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/97/1, 15, 73, 288
Metal-Tech Ltd v Uzbekistan (Award of 4 October 2013) ICSID Case No ARB/10/3, 207
Methanex v USA (Final Award of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction and Merits of 3 August 2005) UNCITRAL, 222, 264
Michael Ballantine and Lisa Ballantine v Dominican Republic (Submission of the United States of America of 22 September 2017) PCA Case No 2016–17, 57
Micula (I) v Romania (Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of 24 September 2008) ICSID Case No ARB/05/20, 289
Micula (I) v Romania (Final Award of 11 December 2013) ICSID Case No ARB/05/20, 289
Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co SA v Egypt (Award of 12 April 2002)
ICSID Case No ARB/99/6, 197
Mobil Investments Canada Inc & Murphy Oil Corporation v Canada (Decision on Liability and Principles of Quantum of 22 May 2012) ICSID Case No
ARB(AF)/07/4, 5
Mobil Oil Corporation & ors v New Zealand (Decision on Liability of 6 January 1988)
ICSID Case No
ARB/87/2, 83
Mondev International Ltd v USA (Award of 11 October 2002) ICSID Case No
ARB(AF)/99/2, 39, 107, 313, 319
Montijo (USA) v Colombia (Award of 10 April 1875) published in JB Moore (ed), History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, Vol 2 (US GPO 1898), 79
Mr Franck Charles Arif v Moldova (Award of 8 April 2013) ICSID Case No ARB/11/23, 16
MTD Equity Sdn Bhd v Chile (Decision on Annulment of 21 March 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/01/7, 183
Murphy v Ecuador (Award of 6 May 2016) PCA Case No AA434, 298
Muszynianka v Slovakia (Award 7 of October 2020) PCA Case No 2017–08, 215
National Grid plc v Argentina (Decision on Jurisdiction of 20 June 2006) UNCITRAL, 220
Neptune (1797) 4 Moore Arbitrations 3843, 168
• Opinion of Mr Gore, 169
• Opinion of Mr Pinkney, 169
• Opinion of Mr Trumbull, 169
NextEra v Spain (Award of 12 March 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/14/11, 305
Noble Ventures Inc v Romania (Award of 12 October 2005) ICSID Case No ARB/01/11, 100, 342
North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case (GB v USA) (1910) 11 RIAA 167, 239
Norwegian Shipowners’ Claims (Norway v USA) (Award of 13 October 1922) I RIAA 307, 81, 199
Novenergia II v Spain (Final Award of 15 February 2018) SCC Case No 2015/063, 74, 298
Nykomb v Latvia (Arbitral Award of 16 December 2003) SCC Case No 118/2001, 101, 286
OAO Tatneft v Ukraine (Award on the Merits of 29 July 2014) PCA Case No 2008–8, 85
Occidental v Ecuador (Award of 5 October 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/06/11, 300
xxix table of cases
Oko Pankki Oyj, VTB Bank (Deutschland) AG and Sampo Bank Plc v Estonia (Award of 19 November 2007) ICSID Case No ARB/04/6, 16
Olin v Libya (Final Award of 25 May 2018) ICC Case No 20355/MCP, 106
Oliva (Italy) v Venezuela (1903) published in MM Whiteman, Damages in International Law, Vol III (US GPO 1943), 79
Oostergetel v Slovakia (Decision on Jurisdiction 30 April 2010) UNCITRAL, 215
Oostergetel v Slovakia (Final Award of 23 April 2012) UNCITRAL, 107
OperaFund v Spain (Award of 6 September 2019) ICSID Case No ARB/15/36, 74, 180, 286
Opinion in the Lusitania Cases (1923) VII RIAA 32, 180
Orinoco Steamship Company Case (1910) XI RIAA 16, 190
Orr and Laubenheimer and the Post-Glover Electric Company (1900) 15 RIAA 33, 157
PA Allard v Barbados (Award of 27 June 2017) PCA Case No 2012–06, 16
Pac Rim v El Salvador (Award of 14 October 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/09/12, 106
Paushok v Mongolia (Decision on Jurisdiction of 28 April 2011) UNCITRAL, 101
Pezold v Zimbabwe (Award of 28 July 2015) ICSID Case No ARB/10/15, 26, 104, 152, 289
Pezold v Zimbabwe (Procedural Order No 2 of 26 June 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/10/15, 330
Philip Morris v Uruguay (Award of 8 July 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/10/7, 242
Philip Morris v Uruguay (Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of Gary Born of 8 July 2016) ICSID Case No ARB/10/7, 244
Phillips Petroleum v Iran (Award of 29 June 1989 (Award No 425-39-2)) IUSCT Case No 39, 21 IUSCT 79, 205
Poggioli Case (1903) 10 RIAA 669, 241
Pope & Talbot Inc v Canada (Award in Respect of Damages of 31 May 2002)
UNCITRAL, 221, 319
Pope & Talbot Inc v Canada (Award on the Merits of Phase II of 10 April 2001)
UNCITRAL, 4
PV Investors v Spain (Final Award of 28 February 2020) PCA Case No 2012–14, 290
Quiborax v Bolivia (Award of 16 September 2015) ICSID Case No ARB/06/2, 88, 112, 244, 295
• Partially Dissenting Opinion of Brigitte Stern of 7 September 2015, 89
Railroad Development Corporation (RDC) v Guatemala (Award of 29 June 2012) ICSID Case No ARB/07/23, 7
Règlement des prestations effectuées dans la Ruhr (1927) II RIAA 797, 191
Renco (I) v Peru (Partial Award on Jurisdiction of 15 July 2016) ICSID Case No UNCT/13/1, 220
RENERGY v Spain (Award of 6 May 2022) ICSID Case No ARB/14/18, 225
Reynolds Jamaica Mines Limited and Reynolds Metals Company v Jamaica (Order Taking Note of the Discontinuance of 12 October 1977) ICSID Case No ARB/74/4, 82
Rompetrol v Romania (Award of 6 May 2013) ICSID Case No ARB/06/3, 101
