Interpretation — ICSID award — Admissibility requirements for Application for Interpretation — Whether full payment of amount stipulated within Award precluding investor from seeking interpretation of Award — Application to interpret determination of “expropriation” in Award and its consequences for interrelationship between investor and State — Whether admissible under Article 50 of ICSID Convention

Interpretation — ICSID award — Whether determination in Award that investment subject to “expropriation” meaning total and permanent deprivation of investor’s fundamental rights of ownership in assets constituting the investment — Whether such a determination precluding State from legal actions presuming the contrary of Tribunal’s determination in Award

Interpretation — ICSID award — Application to determine consequences of determination of “expropriation” in Award for relationships between the investor and third parties — Whether admissible under Article 50 of ICSID Convention

Jurisdiction — Objections to jurisdiction — Bilateral investment treaty — Exceptions to the nationality requirement — icsid Convention, Article 25(2)(b) — Whether company incorporated in one State Party and owned by nationals of another State Party is a “national” of the former — Existence of prima facie “legal dispute” for the purpose of determining jurisdiction

Arbitration — Bilateral investment treaty — Alleged violations of bit by Respondent through its State enterprise

Foreign investment — Failure to provide “fair and equitable treatment” and “full protection and security” to an investment — UK–Egypt Bilateral Investment Treaty, Article 2(2) — Failure to prevent seizure of an investment — Failure to impose substantial sanctions for seizure

Expropriation — Failure to provide prompt, adequate and effective compensation — UK–Egypt Bilateral Investment Treaty, Article 5

Municipal law — Time bar — Whether claims time-barred by domestic statute of limitation — Domestic statutes of limitation not binding on international tribunal

Damages — Determination of damages — Prompt, adequate and effective compensation — Compensation amounting to the market value of an investment — UK–Egypt Bilateral Investment Treaty, Article 5

Annulment — Time limit for request for annulment — icsid Convention, Article 52 — Raising new arguments related to a ground of annulment invoked within the time limit fixed in the icsid Convention

Annulment — Grounds for — Manifest failure to apply applicable law — icsid Convention, Article 42(1) — Subject matter of commercial agreements as opposed to subject matter brought before icsid arbitration — Role of international law in the context of Article 42(1) — Relationship between international law and domestic law

Annulment — Grounds for — Manifest excess of power by arbitral tribunal — Sufficiency of evidence — Relationship between domestic arbitration and arbitration under the icsid Convention — Compensation under domestic arbitration to be taken into account when awarding damages under the icsid Convention — Criteria for compensation under UK–Egypt Bilateral Investment Treaty, Article 5

Compensation — Interest — How calculated — Compound interest — Exercise of discretion

Jurisdiction — Acquisition of shares — Whether acquisition of shares an “investment” — Whether private commercial dispute — Proceedings brought in national court — Whether required to exhaust local remedies — Separate arbitration brought under another treaty — Whether jurisdiction affected

Expropriation — Coercion to amend legal structure and lose security — Whether indirect expropriation breach of BIT — Whether breach of obligation to provide full security and protection — Whether breach of obligation to treat fairly and equitably — Whether unreasonable and discriminatory measures

Procedure — Binding award — Partial award — Party seeking to relitigate issues in partial award

Damages — Calculation of damages — Just compensation — Whether fair market value is just compensation — Interest — Costs

Jurisdiction — NAFTA, Article 1131(1) — Whether tribunal has jurisdiction to review violations of GATT — NAFTA, Articles 1116 and 1117 — Limitation on tribunal's jurisdiction — Whether tribunal may seek guidance in GATT/WTO jurisprudence

Procedure — Applicability of lex loci arbitri to procedural matters — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 32(2) — Whether partial award is final and binding — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 15(1) — Whether tribunal may reconsider a partial award at later stage — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 35 — Whether partial award has different binding force from final award

Jurisdiction — Challenge to arbitrator — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 12(1) — No power of UNCITRAL tribunal to decide challenges to arbitrators

Jurisdiction — NAFTA, Article 1101 — Measures relating to investors and investment — Affirmative finding under Articles 1102, 1105 and 1110 of NAFTA as evidence of “relationship” under Article 1101 — Failure to show intention to harm foreign producers — Failure to show a significant connection between the challenged measures, the investor and the investment

Procedure — Amendment of claim — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 20 — Whether claimant may rely on amended legislation as evidence — Due process of law — Whether claimant may bring new claim relating to amended legislation — NAFTA, Article 1121(1) — Requirement of waiver — When amendment permissible under Articles 1116 and/or 1117 of NAFTA — Requirement to show loss and damage

Evidence — Admissibility of evidence — Requirement to make request for disclosure of evidence in timely manner — Good faith in collecting evidence — Claimant's indifference to the legality of evidence collected — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 15(1) — Equal treatment and procedural fairness — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 25(6) — Tribunal's discretion to admit evidence — No value of evidence obtained unlawfully — Credibility of evidence — When tribunal may resort to inference

Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 32 — When recourse to supplementary means is appropriate

Interpretation — NAFTA, Article 1102 — Cumulative requirement to demonstrate intention to favour domestic investors and “like circumstances” — Whether comparator of “like circumstances” should be whole industry or identical investor — Intention to discriminate — Whether GATT/WTO jurisprudence is relevant in interpretation

Interpretation — NAFTA, Article 1105 — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 31(3)(a) — Whether interpretation by NAFTA Free Trade Commission is a “subsequent agreement” — NAFTA, Article 1105, minimum standard of treatment — Whether measures arbitrary, unfair, unjust and discriminatory — Whether differentiation between nationals and aliens permitted — Customary international law

Expropriation — NAFTA, Article 1110 — Measure tantamount to expropriation — Whether regulation for public purpose expropriatory and compensable

Costs — UNCITRAL Rules, Article 40 — Whether unsuccessful party should bear all costs — Apportionment of costs — Reasonable costs

Procedure — Counterclaim — Whether requiring involvement of third party — Whether counterclaim closely connected to primary investment dispute

Jurisdiction — Acquisition of shares — Whether acquisition of shares an “investment” — Investor — Whether good faith required — Whether real and continuous social and economic links required

Treaties — BIT — Whether Tribunal having jurisdiction over dispute — Whether Czech Republic acting in breach of BIT — Expropriation — Forced administration of bank — Whether indirect expropriation — Public financial assistance — Refusal to negotiate in good faith — Predictable and transparent framework — Government official leaking negative information — Suspension of trading of shares — Whether breach of obligation to treat fairly and equitably — Whether unreasonable and discriminatory measures — Whether failure to prevent unjust enrichment — Whether breach of non-impairment obligation — Whether breach of obligation to provide full security and protection — Whether Czech Republic acting in breach of Articles 3 and 5 of BIT — Whether Czech Republic liable for damages — Appropriate redress for breach and questions of quantum for second phase of arbitration

Annulment — Stay of enforcement — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1) — Provision of security — Discretion of ad hoc committee to decide on security — Burden on claimant to show security required — Annulment proceeding not an exceptional circumstance justifying security

Annulment — Manifest excess of powers — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1)(b) — Meaning of “manifestly” — “Test” of manifest excess of powers — Whether tribunal had manifestly acted without jurisdiction — ICSID Convention, Article 41(2) — Tribunal as judge of its own competence — Whether manifest lack of jurisdiction if decision under Article 41(2) incorrect

Annulment — Function of annulment committee — No appeal or de novo review

Foreign investment — Standing — Investment through company — Controlling shareholding — When investor not legal owner of assets constituting investment — When investor not party to contract giving rise to rights constituting an investment — Investor’s financial and commercial interest in the investment — Separate legal personalities and rights and obligations of shareholders and company — Right of shareholder to pursue investment treaty claim — ICSID Convention, Article 25(2)(b) — Multiple proceedings — ICSID proceedings of shareholders in light of proceedings brought by company in national courts — Prevention of double recovery

Applicable law — Annulment — Whether tribunal disregarded applicable law — ICSID Convention, Article 42 — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1)(b) — BIT governed by international law — ICSID Convention, BIT and international law as applicable law — Municipal law helpful in determining breach of BIT — General principles of international law — Applicable law in determination of “fair and equitable” standard

Annulment — Failure to state reasons — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1)(e) — Whether the award contained contradictory statements — Tribunal’s refusal to consider an issue — Whether serious departure from fundamental rule of procedure

Annulment — Denial of fundamental evidence — ICSID Convention, Article 43(a) — ICSID Arbitration Rule 34(2) — Tribunal’s discretionary power to call upon a party to produce documents — No right of party to obtain evidence from opposing party — Inequality of treatment of parties — Application of different standards in admission of evidence

Procedure — Composition of tribunal — Disqualification of arbitrator — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1)(a) — ICSID Convention, Articles 57 and 58 — No right to de novo review of challenge of arbitrator — Waiver of rights to raise objections — Estoppel from raising objections

Annulment — Damages — ICSID Convention, Article 52(1)(a) — Tribunal’s discretion to apply “fair market value” standard

Annulment — Costs of annulment proceedings — Administrative and Financial Regulations, Regulations 14(3)(d) and 14(3)(e) — Applicant to bear costs of entirely unsuccessful application

Jurisdiction – Foreign investor – Foreign control – Substantial interest – Whether the investors satisfied the conditions of nationality under the BIT – Whether nationals of the home State had a substantial interest in the investors – Whether a substantial interest needed to be a controlling or a majority interest

Jurisdiction – Foreign investor – Denial of benefits – Requirement to consult – Whether the host State promptly consulted the home State to seek a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter – Whether exercising a denial-of-benefits clause amounted to withdrawing unilaterally a previously given consent – Whether the denial-of-benefits clause could be exercised after the investment claim had been filed

Jurisdiction – Investment – Indirect investment – Burden of proof – Whether an investor proved its alleged beneficial interest in an investment through a corporate vehicle

Jurisdiction – Consent – Contract claims – Whether the claim was purely contractual – Whether the investors submitted a treaty claim

Jurisdiction – Consent – Exclusions and reservations – Taxation measures – Whether a carve-out clause for taxation barred the investors’ claims of expropriation

Jurisdiction – Investment – Legality – Corruption – Public policy – Burden of proof – Whether the State discharged its burden of proof in establishing that the investment was illegal and made in corrupt circumstances

Admissibility – Abuse of process – Whether resorting to four parallel arbitrations with the same factual matrix, same witnesses and many identical claims was abusive – Whether the nature of those parallel claims was identical – Whether pursuit of the same claim before different investment tribunals should be allowed – Whether an investor should make an election to resolve overlapping claims in parallel proceedings

State responsibility – Attribution – State-owned entity – Contract – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 4 – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 5 – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 8 – ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Article 11 – Whether the State was liable for contractual obligations undertaken by two State entities

Expropriation – Compensation – Legal stability – Tax exemption – Whether a licence granting taxation privileges constituted a protected investment – Whether the revocation of a licence constituted an expropriation – Whether the investors had the right to retain the taxation privileges beyond the initial period of the licence

Full protection and security – Due diligence – Civil unrest – Whether the State took reasonable precautionary, preventive and remedial measures to protect the physical security of a pipeline network from sabotage

Procedure – Res judicata – Contract – Privity of interest – Force majeure – Whether the factual findings on the sabotage of a pipeline network in a parallel commercial arbitration were binding on the tribunal – Whether the legal findings on contractual termination in a parallel commercial arbitration were binding on the tribunal

Expropriation – Unlawful expropriation – Contract – Whether State entities wrongfully terminated a contract under the proper law – Whether unlawful termination of a contract was tantamount to an unlawful expropriation

Procedure — Participation of third parties in ICSID proceedings — Amicus curiae petitions — Whether consent of parties is necessary to admit petitions — Powers of ICSID tribunal in case of third-party petitions

Procedure — Request for postponement of hearing — Whether sufficient cause exists to postpone hearing

Evidence — ICSID Convention, Article 43 — Discretion of tribunal in ordering production of evidence — Tribunal's considerations in ordering the production of evidence

Jurisdiction — Interplay between forum selection clauses — Consent to ICSID jurisdiction — Tribunal's duty to exercise jurisdiction — Claims under investment contracts — Whether dispute settlement clause in contract precludes ICSID jurisdiction — Whether ambiguous clause may imply a waiver of jurisdiction

Jurisdiction — Whether change of incorporation bars jurisdiction — Corporate migration — Applicable law for the evaluation of the legal status of a company — Corporate restructure without host State's consent — Whether transfer of ownership bars jurisdiction — Legal effect of statements by State party to BIT — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) and (3)

Foreign investment — Investor — National for purposes of ICSID jurisdiction — Foreign control — Meaning of “controlled directly or indirectly” — Legal potential to control and exercise of actual control — Whether majority ownership is sufficient to demonstrate “control” — Whether “control” requires demonstration of effective control — Control as quality of ownership interest

nafta — Chapter 11 — Claim pursuant to Additional Facility Rules — Place of arbitration — Relevant factors — Joinder of jurisdictional objections to merits — Extent of discovery — Confidentiality

Municipal law — Confidentiality of proceedings — Application of national freedom of information legislation to pleadings, minutes of meetings, orders of Tribunal — Extent and duration of parties’ obligation of confidentiality absent statutory obligations of disclosure — nafta, Article 1126, Annex 1137.4 — Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules, Articles 14, 24, 38, 44

State responsibility — nafta, Articles 1102, 1105, 1110 — Application to acts done before nafta’s entry into force — National court decisions after entry into force — Retrospective effect

Jurisdiction — Proceedings brought under nafta, Article 1116(1) — Whether brought “on behalf of an enterprise” — Failure to rely on Article 1117(1)

Jurisdiction — Termination of an investment — Lapse of contractual option — Bank’s foreclosure on mortgage over investment property — Subsisting claims under national law — Whether an “investment” — Relevance of ownership of national law proprietary rights — nafta, Article 1139

Admissibility — Claim brought more than three years after incidents causing damage — Three-year time-limit — Application — nafta, Article 1116(2)

nafta — Free Trade Commission interpretation — Whether binding on Chapter 11 Tribunal — Whether “interpretation” or “amendment” — Scope of ftc interpretation — Effect on pending proceedings

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — Denial of justice — Whether “new law” applied retrospectively — Procedural decisions — Scope and standard of nafta review

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — “Full protection and security” — Statutory immunity of State agency in respect of intentional torts — Tortious interference with contractual relations — Jury finding implying lack of legitimate regulatory purpose — Whether immunity in breach of Article 1105(1)

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — “Full protection and security” — Non-application of trade practices law to regulatory authority

nafta — Chapter 11 — Award of costs and expenses — Extent of Tribunal’s discretion

Arbitration – Request by Claimant — US–Sri Lanka Bilateral Investment Treaty — Jurisdiction of icsid and Arbitral Tribunal — Both jurisdiction ratione personae and materiae must be satisfied — Respondent’s objections to jurisdiction

Jurisdiction — Objection to jurisdiction ratione personae — Nationality requirement of icsid Convention — Theories of partnership or assignment — Claimant permitted to file its own claim in its own name — Capacity to bring claim not modified by existence of international partnership — Pacta tertiis principle — No invocation of icsid Convention by non-State party, non-State party national or company– No improvement of rights of non-State party company by assignment of rights to party with standing before Tribunal

Jurisdiction — Objection ratione materiae — Existence of an “investment” — Requirements of Article 25(1) of the icsid Convention not satisfied — Existence of investment within meaning of Convention and bit — Preparatory and development expenses incurred pursuant to letter of intent from Respondent — Recovery of development costs following failure of negotiations — Definition of “investment” a question of law — No investment within meaning of icsid Convention

Expropriation — Taking of property — Contractual rights — Company entitled to share in profits from hotel — Whether takeover of hotel a taking of rights under the contract — Whether causing loss — Principles of international law regarding expropriation — Concept of acquired rights — Due process Measure of compensation

Nationality — Companies — Corporate group — Company investing in foreign State — Wholly —owned subsidiary incorporated in State of investment Whether treated as foreign business for purpose of international law — Parent company’s existence determined by law of State of incorporation

State responsibility — For injury to aliens — Duty to protect aliens — Duty to protect from arbitrary action by officials — State responsibility for judicial acts — Whether limited to cases of denial of justice

Treaties — Interpretation — Principles of interpretation — Good faith — icsid Convention — Whether principle that arbitration provisions should be restrictively interpreted

Jurisdiction — Of arbitration tribunal — Arbitration clause in contract between government and company — Whether clause to be restrictively construed — Standing of claimant company — Corporate group — Which company within group entitled to initiate arbitration proceedings

Applicable law — International law — Sources of international law — Equity Whether part of international law — Distinction between equity and power of tribunal to decide ex aequo et bono

Arbitrators — Disqualification — Arbitrator appointed by party to arbitration — Previous connection with party — Whether grounds for disqualification Duties of party appointed arbitrator

Damages — For expropriation — Measure of damages — Contractual rights Damnum emergens — Lucrum cessans — Methods of valuation — Discounted cash flow method — Access of company to daily cash flow generated by business subject to fiduciary duties — Effect on compensation

Provisional measures — Grounds on which provisional measures will be ordered — Publication of information concerning case — Intention of publishing party — Whether aggravating or exacerbating legal dispute Whether rendering solution of legal dispute more difficult

Annulment — Grounds for annulment — Failure to decide all the questions referred to the tribunal — Failure to state reasons on which award based Consequences of partial annulment — Resubmission of case to new arbitration tribunal — Whether those parts of first award which are not annulled constitute res judicata — Jurisdiction of tribunal on resubmission of case.

Annulment — Challenge to award of arbitration tribunal — Reference to ad hoc Committee — Effect of partial annulment — Resubmission of case to new arbitration tribunal

Applicable law — Proceedings for annulment of award — Law governing annulment proceedings — Principles and rules of treaty interpretation generally recognized in international law

Evidence — Corruption — Bad faith — Bribery — Whether the State may prove allegations of bad faith or corruption without putting the allegations to witnesses — Whether the review of mining licences was a response to the refusal to pay a bribe

Jurisdiction — Dispute — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) — Whether there was no dispute because the State had merely suspended rather than revoked the mining licence

Jurisdiction — Consent — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) — Cooling-off period — Whether each party had consented to arbitration — Whether the investors had satisfied the three-month cooling-off period required under the BIT through negotiations and municipal legal proceedings

Jurisdiction — Investment — Foreign investor — ICSID Convention, Article 25 — Origin of capital — Salini test — Bad faith — Whether there was no protected investment because the investors were shell companies for investment from a third State — Whether the investment satisfied the criteria of risk, duration and contribution to the economic development of the host State — Whether jurisdiction should be declined due to allegations of bad faith

Jurisdiction — Investment — Legality — Municipal law — Intangible assets — Environmental impact assessment — Proportionality — Bad faith — Whether there was an implied requirement that investments be in accordance with the laws of the host State — Whether a prospecting licence and data generated thereunder qualified for protection if the licence did not legally permit the investor to generate revenue in the host State — Whether licences acquired contrary to the requirement of an environmental impact statement and other municipal protections were void ab initio under municipal law — Whether the tribunal should accept rulings of the municipal courts — Whether it was proportionate to decline jurisdiction in the light of the significance of the legal obligations, the seriousness of the investor’s conduct and whether those factors resulted in a sufficiently significant violation of the interests of the host State — Whether protection of a mining licence would have been denied on the merits for want of legality and good faith in the exercise of a State official’s discretion even if it was not void ab initio under municipal law

Costs — Costs follow the event — Reduction — Whether the claim for costs was manifestly excessive — Whether the conduct of the party seeking costs warranted a reduction due to unproven claims of corruption

Arbitration — Challenge to validity of arbitral award — Application by plaintiff to Swedish court to set aside arbitral award — Section 36 of Arbitration Act 1999 — Whether arbitral tribunal ruling on all issues submitted to it — Whether arbitral tribunal ruling on substance — Whether Section 36 of Arbitration Act 1999 applicable

Costs — Arbitral tribunal’s decision on costs — Application by plaintiff to Swedish court to vary decision on costs — Czech Republic’s litigation costs — Whether plaintiff liable

Jurisdiction — Dispute arising directly out of an investment — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) — Whether measures affect investment directly even if not specifically aimed at investment

Foreign investment — Definition of investment — Investment through acquisition of shares — Whether licences and guarantees held by consortium an investment of shareholder — Whether consortium in which shareholder has shares an investment — Full control of shareholding — Separate legal personalities and rights and obligations of investor and consortium — Whether BIT protection limited to shareholding — Whether claims invoked on behalf of consortium

Foreign investment — Definition of investment — Licences and guarantees held by an entity other than investor — Additional circumstances in considering licences and guarantees as investment

Jurisdiction — Contract claims as opposed to treaty claims — Recourse to dispute settlement a matter of investor’s right — Whether existence of contractual remedies limit such right — Effect of exclusive choice of forum clause in contract — Whether claims constitute breach of contract

Jurisdiction — Most-favoured-nation (MFN) clause — Requirement that claims be first submitted to domestic courts — Whether MFN clause applies to dispute settlement — Position of a party on the scope of MFN clause expressed in litigation and “subsequent practice” within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Jurisdiction — Damages, demonstration of at jurisdictional phase

Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 31.3(b) — Whether pleading a certain interpretation of a treaty provision constitutes “subsequent practice”

Expropriation — Nationalization — Nationalization by State of company in which it was a shareholder — Whether in the public interest — Whether nationalization incompatible with the contract between State and foreign company

Stabilization clauses — Nationalization — Whether in public interest — Whether compatible with stabilization clauses — Status of contract in international law — Duty to pay compensation — Repudiation by State of its contractual obligations — Proper law of agreement — Law of contracting State to be supplemented by international law — Whether local law subordinate to international law

Arbitrators — Appointment by ICSID in default of appointment by party Applicable law — Whether tribunal to act as friendly arbitrator — Existence of a dispute

Damages — Measure of damages — Loss of profits — Claim limited to nominal amount

Interest — Rate of interest — Date from which interest payable