No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Europe v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 July 2022
Abstract
Procedure – Challenge to arbitrator – ICSID Convention, Article 57 – ICSID Convention, Article 14 – Independence – Impartiality – Issue conflict – Whether previous administrative or political appointments in government led to manifest lack of qualifications to exercise independent judgment – Whether an arbitrator’s previous advocacy on behalf of a State created the risk of an issue conflict
Admissibility – Attribution – Contract – Whether alleged breaches of a contract entered into by an investor’s subsidiary and a State-owned entity were attributable to the State – Whether the alleged breaches of contract should be determined on the merits of the alleged breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment
Admissibility – Procedure – Incidental or additional claim – Whether a claim was untimely if raised for the first time in the hearing on jurisdiction and merits – Whether there was sufficient opportunity for both parties to respond to the claim
Expropriation – Interpretation – Measures – Particular undertaking – Whether the term “measures” required an expropriation to consist of a formal exercise of government powers – Whether notion of a particular undertaking included other provisions of a BIT or was limited to external agreements entered into by the State
Expropriation – Prompt compensation – Interpretation – Good faith – VCLT, Article 31(1) – Manifestly absurd or unreasonable – VCLT, Article 32(b) – Municipal law – Whether the payment of prompt compensation required the State to specify a certain figure constituting the amount of compensation on the date of expropriation – Whether that interpretation contravened the principle of good faith interpretation – Whether that interpretation led to a manifestly absurd or unreasonable result – Whether a tribunal had to examine whether municipal law implemented an expropriation procedure in accordance with the BIT
Expropriation – De facto expropriation – Whether acquiring de facto control of an investment with the aim of ultimately carrying out an expropriation could amount to an expropriation
Expropriation – Attribution – Non-State actors – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 8 – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 11 – Whether the physical takeover of a plant by former workers, union officials and sympathetic politicians was under the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, the State – Whether causality between a presidential announcement and the physical takeover was sufficient to attribute the conduct of non-State actors – Whether the subsequent adoption of the conduct of non-State actors by a State-owned entity vested with governmental authority was attributable to the State
Expropriation – Attribution – State-owned entity – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 5 – Whether the presence of a State-owned entity in the investor’s abandoned plant was merely in a caretaker capacity for reasons of public safety – Whether the State-owned entity was vested with governmental authority to nationalise the plant
Procedure – Judicial economy – Remedies – Whether a tribunal had to make a finding on an alleged breach of the standard of fair and equitable treatment when it would not have altered the amount of compensation to which the investor was entitled
Fair and equitable treatment – Legitimate expectation – Legal stability – Contract – Attribution – State-owned entity – Whether a legitimate expectation of the contractual performance of a State-owned entity at a certain price can be formed in the absence of a specific commitment from the State guaranteeing such performance or price – Whether any breach of contract had been established – Whether it was necessary to address the issue of attribution in the absence of contractual breach
Full protection and security – Legal stability – Contract – State-owned entity – Whether the State had an obligation to protect an investor from alleged contractual breaches by a State-owned entity
Remedies – Compensation – Expropriation – Quantum – Fair market value – Discounted cash flow – Country risk premium – Evidence – Whether a finding of unlawfulness was relevant to the standard of compensation for expropriation – Whether the value of the investment was higher on the date of expropriation or the date of award – Whether fair market value could be determined using the method of discounted cash flow – Whether the discount rate applied to future cash flows should include the risk of expropriation as part of the country risk premium – Whether the evidence presented by the parties’ experts determined the correct variables of future cash flows – Whether a reduction in future profits should be made to account for the investment’s dependence on the investor’s marketing and distribution networks – Whether the investor was entitled to compensation for historical losses arising from increases in the price of inputs
Remedies – Compensation – Interest – Compound interest – Whether interest should be calculated on a simple basis because compound interest was prohibited under municipal law – Whether compound interest would ensure full reparation under international law for the time value of the investor’s losses
Annulment – Procedure – Seat – ICSID Convention, Article 62 – Whether annulment proceedings may be conducted in a place different from the seat of ICSID absent agreement of parties
Annulment – Procedure – Stay of enforcement – Whether a stay of enforcement of the award should be lifted because the applicant for annulment failed to pay an advance on costs
Annulment – Procedure – Suspension of proceedings – Whether annulment proceedings should be suspended because the applicant for annulment failed to pay an advance on costs
Keywords
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press 2022