Holland & Knight Mexico Practice - International Investment Treaty Arbitration

Page 1

Investment Treaty Arbitration Investment Treaty Arbitration Proceedings Holland & Knight's Mexico City office includes Mexican and international practitioners with profound experience in Investment Treaty Arbitration. Our Investment Treaty Arbitration team based in Mexico City disposes of combined experience in more than 16 investment treaty arbitration proceedings under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) rules representing investors and governments.

Non-Contentious Advice on Investment Treaties and Investment Structuring In addition to acting as counsel in investment treaty arbitration proceedings, members of Holland & Knight's Investment Treaty Arbitration team in Mexico have analyzed and advised on a large number of potential investment treaty cases based on bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and free trade agreements (FTAs). They have also provided investment structuring advice to foreign investors in view of protecting their investments in anticipation of future disputes.

Investment Treaty Negotiations Finally, members of our Investment Treaty Arbitration team have conducted and participated in various negotiations of international treaties between States, including their investment and dispute resolution provisions, such as the 1994 North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, Vietnam); the FTA between Mexico and Jordan; the FTA between Mexico and Turkey; the Doha Round of the World Trade Organization (WTO); the FTA between Mexico and Peru; the FTA between Mexico and Central America (ALADI); the FTA between Mexico, Argentina and Brazil; as well as numerous BITs.

DISTINGUISHABLE CHARACTERISTICS  Holland & Knight's Investment Treaty Arbitration team in Mexico is bilingual and able to work seamlessly between English and Spanish (as well as in French and German) without added translation costs (including internal translations into English for non-Spanish speaking clients of all documents officially submitted in Spanish)  The team has at its disposal cultural affinities with Latin America, which include – but go beyond – deep knowledge of the Civil Law and local regulations  The team's experience is strong with regard to Mexico. Counting Mexico's former lead counsel and a group of highly knowledgeable attorneys with direct experience on investment disputes related to Mexico and other Latin American countries, among its lawyers. Our Mexico City team has a wealth of experience in acting for and against government in investment treaty arbitrations

Copyright © 2020 Holland & Knight LLP All Rights Reserved

1


Representative Experience*  Eutelsat S.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/17/2, arbitration proceeding against measures undertaken by the Mexican Telecommunications Institute (IFT) affecting the interests of a satellite company (pending)  KBR Inc. and Corporación Mexicana de Mantenimiento Integral v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. UNCT/14/1, resulting in a favorable award on jurisdiction for Mexico under NAFTA's Chapter 11  Cervin Investissements S.A. and Rhone Investissements S.A. v. the Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/2, investment treaty arbitration against measures adopted by the government in relation to the imposition of tariffs in the LPG market  Telefónica S.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/12/4, relating to claims against the imposition of interconnection tariffs violating the protections contained in the bilateral investment treaty between Mexico and Spain (settled)  Abengoa, S.A. and COFIDES, S.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/09/2, relating to claims of Spanish investors for damages suffered from measures undertaken by the government in connection with a waste treatment plant in Hidalgo, Mexico  Cargill Inc. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/02; Corn Products International v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/01, related to a tariff imposed by Mexico on soft drinks containing fructose in view of protecting its national sugar industry  Gemplus, S.A., SLP, S.A., Gemplus Industrial, S.A. de C.V. and Talsud, S.A., v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Cases No. ARB(AF)/04/3 and No. ARB(AF)/04/4), related to the cancellation of a national registry of vehicles (RENAVE)  Merck Sharpe & Dohme (I.A.) Corporation v. the Republic of Ecuador, PCA Case No. 2012-10, an investment treaty arbitration proceeding initiated by a pharmaceutical company against a judgment rendered by the local courts relating to the sale of a manufacturing plant  Various degrees of involvement (including lead counsel) in the representation of the Mexican Government in the following cases: Fireman's Fund Insurance Company v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/02/1; Técnicas Medioambientales, S.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/2; Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/01; Waste Management Inc. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/98/02; Metalclad Corporation v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/01 *Attorneys may have participated in some cases through prior employment.

Copyright © 2020 Holland & Knight LLP All Rights Reserved

2