Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T01:21:03.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic

ICSID (Arbitration Tribunal).  08 December 2003 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Arbitration — ICSID Convention, Article 41 — Duty of tribunal to judge its own competence — Consent by parties to jurisdiction of ICSID

Treaties — Bilateral investment treaty — 1991 Argentina–United States Treaty concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment (“BIT”) — Whether Argentina breached its obligations to claimant under BIT

Settlement — Attempt to reach amicable settlement — Within first six months after dispute arising — Article VII(3) of BIT — Consultation — Negotiation

Jurisdiction — International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes — Competence of tribunal — Article 25 of ICSID Convention — Article VII of BIT

Legal dispute — Dispute arising directly out of investment — Contractual dispute — Concession Agreement — Investment dispute — Mere reference to interpretation or analysis of facts related to performance under Concession Agreement cannot per se transform dispute under BIT into a contractual dispute

Jurisdiction — Waiver of jurisdiction — Exclusive jurisdiction — Objection to jurisdiction — Whether jurisdiction of tribunal can be excluded by waiver clause in Concession Agreement, Bidding Terms, Commitment Letters or Clarifying Circulars — Scope of jurisdiction clauses in Contract Documents — Identity of parties to whom commitments made

Jurisdiction — “Fork-in-the-road” choice — Whether submission of dispute before local courts ousting jurisdiction of ICSID Tribunal — Differentiation of claims and parties

Jurisdiction — Forum selection clause — Difference in subject-matter of proceedings before domestic courts and tribunal — Forum selection or waiver clause not having impact on tribunal’s jurisdiction

Jurisdiction — Jus standi — Indirect investment — Rights of investors — Direct right of action of shareholders

Procedure — Proceedings on merits — Proceedings on jurisdiction suspending proceedings on merits

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2006

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.)