Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:58:03.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ADF Group Inc. v. United States of America

ICSID (Arbitration Tribunal).  11 July 2001 ; 04 October 2001 ; 09 January 2003 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Arbitration — Arbitral procedure — Place of arbitration — icsid Additional Facility arbitration pursuant to Chapter 11 of nafta — Canada or United States — Standard of review of international arbitration in both countries similar — Convenience of parties and Tribunal — Arbitration conducted at icsid headquarters — Neutrality as between parties

Arbitration — Documents — Disclosure — Documents available to the public on reasonable inquiry — Whether requiring to be specifically disclosed — Test of necessity — Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules, Article 41(2)

Jurisdiction — Alleged breach of nafta Article 1103 asserted in course of pleadings — Article 1103 not mentioned in Notice of Intention to arbitrate — Whether Tribunal deprived of jurisdiction over Article 1103 claim — nafta, Article 1119

Jurisdiction — Over “incidental or additional claims” — How related to primary claim — Requirement of close relationship or connection — Claimant failing to present evidence of such connection — Absence of jurisdiction — Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules, Article 48(1)

Discrimination — Local manufacture requirement — Applicable equally to local as to foreign suppliers — No showing of discrimination in law or fact nafta, Article 1102

nafta — Domestic content requirement — Whether excluded from nafta Article 1106 as procurement by a Party — Whether federal funding programme involves procurement — Whether procurement by component State “procurement by a Party” — ilc Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Article 4 — nafta, Article 1108, Annex 1001.1a-3

Foreign investment — Investment protection — “Full protection and security” — naftaftc Interpretation of 31 July 2001 — Whether binding on Chapter 11 Tribunals — Meaning of Interpretation — Requirement on Claimant to show that treatment violated a specific rule of customary international law relating to foreign investment — nafta, Articles 1105(1), 1132

nafta — Domestic content requirement — Whether violating contemporary standards of international law embodied in Article 1105(1) — Whether idiosyncratic, aberrant or arbitrary

nafta — Most-favoured-nation treatment — Onus of proof — mfn treatment not applicable to governmental procurement — nafta, Articles 1103, 1108(7)(a)

Costs — Costs against defeated Claimant — Nature and complexity of proceedings — Costs shared equally between parties

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2004

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.)