Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T13:51:17.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A., S.C. Starmill S.R.L. & S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Christina Knahr
Christina Knahr*
Affiliation:
Department of European, International and Comparative Law, University of Vienna
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
International Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 104 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 81 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Micula, v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility (Sept. 24, 2008), 48 ILM 48 (2008)Google Scholar, available at http://arbitration.fr/resources/ICSID–ARB–05–20.pdf.

2 Article 25(2) of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, Mar.18, 1965, 17 UST 1270, 575 UNTS 159, provides:

“National of another Contracting State” means:

  • (a)

    (a) any natural person who had the nationality of a Contracting State other than the State party to the dispute on the date on which the parties consented to submit such dispute to conciliation or arbitration as well as on the date on which the request was registered pursuant to paragraph (3) of Article 28 or paragraph (3) of Article 36, but does not include any person who on either date also had the nationality of the Contracting State party to the dispute;

  • (b)

    (b) any juridical person which had the nationality of a Contracting State other than the State party to the dispute on the date on which the parties consented to submit such dispute to conciliation or arbitration and any juridical person which had the nationality of the Contracting State party to the dispute on that date and which, because of foreign control, the parties have agreed should be treated as a national of another Contracting State for the purposes of this Convention.

3 Nottebohm (Liecht. v. Guat.), Preliminary Objections, 1953 ICJ REP. 111 (Nov. 18).

4 Soufraki v. United Arab Emirates, Icsid Case No. ARB/02/7, Award (July 7, 2004), 12 Icsid Rep. 158 (2007); Soufraki v. United Arab Emirates, Decision of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment of Mr. Soufraki (June 5, 2007), at http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/SoufrakiAnnulment.pdf.

5 In International Law Commission, Report on the Fifty–eighth Session, UN GAOR, 61st Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 16, UN Doc. A/61/10 (2006).

6 See, e.g., Siag v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/15, Decision on Jurisdiction, para. 198 (Apr. 11, 2007); Champion Trading Co. v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/9, Decision on Jurisdiction, at 17 (Oct. 21, 2003).

7 Other cases where the nationality of individuals was a central issue were Soufraki and Siag.

8 See Luke Eric, Peterson, European Commission Moves to Intervene in Another ICSID Arbitration, Micula v. Romania—Dispute Hinging on Withdrawal of Investment Incentives by Romania, Investment Arb. Rep., May 11, 2009, at 3 Google Scholar, available at http://www.iareporter.com/Archive/IAR–05–ll–09.pdf.

9 For examples of other cases, see Luke Eric, Peterson, Path Cleared for BIT Arbitration by Swedish Investors to Challenge the Withdrawal of Investment Incentives by Romania; Romania Says Withdrawal of Incentives for Investments in Economically–Depressed Region Was Done in Order to Comply with European Union Restrictions on State Aid, Investment Arb. Rep., Oct. 1, 2008 Google Scholar, available at http://www.iareporter.com/Archive/IAR–10–01–08.pdf.

10 See Peterson, supra note 8.

11 See http://www.lisbon–treaty.org/wcm/.

12 International Law Commission, Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, in Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its Fifty–third Session, UN GAOR, 56th Sess., Supp.No. 10, at 43, UN Doc. A/56/10 (2001), reprinted in James, Crawford The International Lav/Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction.Text and Commentaries (2002)Google Scholar.