No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA): Reineccius et al. v. Bank for International Settlements
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
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.
- Type
- Judicial and Similar Proceedings
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright ©American Society of International Law 2004
References
* This document was reproduced and reformatted from the text appearing at the PCA website (visited June 1, 2004)<http://www.pca-cpa.org.>
417 Fraser, T. 11238.
1 Partial Award, at para. 209.
2 See also, Order on Costs (5 October 2001). The full text of all of the referenced Procedural Orders can be found at www.pca-cpa.org.
3 Partial Award, at para. 209(5).
4 The Tribunal noted in para. 203 of the Partial Award that the J.P. Morgan Report arrived at a Net Asset Value (“NAV“) of the Bank of US$ 10,072,000,000 or US$ 19,034 (CHF 33,820) per share. As both the Bank and First Eagle agree (see First Eagle's Memorial Pursuant to Partial Award (“FE Memorial Part. Award“), at para. 59), “this was presumably a clerical error, as it actually reflects the data from only one of the three months from which J.P. Morgan calculated an average NAV amount. The conclusion in the report is that: ‘J.P. Morgan has derived the net asset value of BIS of US$19,099 (CHF 33,936) per share ….’ J.P. Morgan Valuation Report 21 (7 Sept. 2000) (the J.P. Morgan Report (Ex. 54)).” Counter-Memorial Pursuant to Partial Award (“BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award“), at para. 2, fn. 2. Claimant No. 1 also used this value in his prayer for relief. Transcript, at p. 386, In. 29; see also infra para. 19. Claimant No. 3 used the CHF 33,936 figure in his Reply Memorial. Mathieu Memoire en Duplique sur la Seconde Phase de l'Arbitrage (“Mathieu Memoire en Duplique Seconde Phase“), at p. 5.
5 Procedural Order No. 10 (9 March 2003) (“Procedural Order No. 10“).
6 Procedural Order No. 3 (Terms of Submission) (5 March 2002), at para. 1, recorded the Parties’ statements at the 26 February 2002 meeting of the Parties with the Tribunal to establish the Terms of Reference that “they have no jurisdictional objections.“
7 Procedural Order No. 10, at para. B.
8 Id., at para. C.
9 Id., at para. D.
10 Claimants Nos. 1 and 2 objected during the 28 May 2003 Hearings to the value that the expert determined. See also supra paras. 7 and 9, and infra fn. 17 and paras. 18, 19(ii), and 32. The Bank requested that the Tribunal abide by the determination in the Partial Award that one expert would determine the value of the real estate and the Parties’ explicit selection of the Ellis firm to determine the value. Transcript, at pp. 604-605.
11 See supra fn. 4, but see infra para. 19(i).
12 Transcript, at p. 331.
13 Id., at p. 388.
14 I leave it up to First Eagle to make a proposal in their and my name as to the nomination of a real estate expert and the schedule for the valuation. [Translation provided by the Tribunal.]
15 See infra para. 32.
16 Transcript, at p. 386.
17 Id., at p. 387. At the Hearings on 28 May 2003, Dr. Reineccius requested that the Tribunal substitute the value for which the Bank's real estate was insured for the value determined by the expert. See also supra paras. 7, 9, and fn.10, and infra para. 32.
18 Transcript, at p. 388.
19 Letter from Dr. Reineccius to Secretary to the Tribunal (27 November 2002).
20 Transcript, at p. 387.
21 Id., at p. 388.
22 First Eagle's Reply Memorial Pursuant to Partial Award (“FE Reply Memorial Part. Award“), at para. 186(a).
23 Id., at para. 154.
24 Id., at para. 162.
25 Id., at paras. 151 and 186(e).
26 Id., at para. 186(d) and (e).
27 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 10; FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 4.
28 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 5.
29 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 70.
30 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 3.
31 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 76.
32 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 83.
33 Id.
34 The Bank “actively monitored movements in the market exchange rate of Swiss francs and U.S. dollars up until the EGM decision.“ BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at para. 77.
35 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 79.
36 Id., at para. 80.
37 Id., at para. 9.
38 Id., at para. 12.
39 Id., at para. 13.
40 Id.
41 Memorial (“BIS Memorial“), at para. 70.
42 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 14.
43 FE Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 28-29.
44 Id., at paras. 30-31.
45 Id., at paras. 32-33.
46 Transcript, at pp. 533-534.
47 First Eagle's Counter-Memorial in Opposition to Counterclaim (“FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim“), at para. 77.
48 Id., at para. 89.
49 Id., at para. 97.
50 Id., at para. 118.
51 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 58.
52 See also Procedural Order No. 9 (On Consent); Partial Award, at para. 205; Mémoire en Demande sur la Seconde Phase de l'Arbitrage (“Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase“), at p. 4; Transcript, at pp. 329-331.
53 First Eagle's Memorial (“FE Memorial“), at para. 205.
54 Cour de Cassation (France), 7 January 1992, reprinted in XVIII Y.B. Comm. Arb. p. 140, at pp. 141-142 (1993).
55 Transcript, at p. 520.
56 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, New York, 10 June 1958, Art. V(1)(d), 21 UST p. 2517, 330 UNTS p. 38 (“New York Convention“).
57 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 186; on 22 May 2003, First Eagle made a further deposit in respect of the costs of arbitration of US$ 259,173.00, bringing its total contribution to the costs of the arbitration to US$ 806,086.40.
58 Mathieu Mémoire en Duplique Seconde Phase, at p. 15.
59 Id.,at p. 5.
60 Id., at p. 3.
61 Id., at p. 15.
62 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 5 (internal citations omitted).
63 Mathieu Mémoire en Duplique Seconde Phase, at pp. 11-12.
64 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 14.
65 Id., at p. 15.
66 Id., at p. 16.
67 Id., at p. 18; see infra para. 48.
68 Mathieu Mémoire en Duplique Seconde Phase, at p. 13.
69 Transcript, at p. 330; see supra para. 18 and infra para. 67; Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 4.
70 Memoire en Demande (“Mathieu Mémoire“), at pp. 7-8.
71 Mathieu Mémoire en Duplique Seconde Phase, at pp. 15-16.
72 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 18; Letter from Mr. Mathieu to the Tribunal and the Bank (27 August 2003).
73 First Eagle SoGen Funds, Inc. v. Bank for Int’l Settlements, No. 01 Civ. 0087(RO), 2001 WL 1150323 (S.D.N.Y., 28 September 2001).
74 Reply Memorial Pursuant to Partial Award (“BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award“), at para. 4 (internal citations omitted).
75 Id., at para. 2.
76 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 38.
77 Id., at para. 5.
78 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 5.
79 Id., at para. 10.
80 Id, at para. 14.
81 Exhibits to Memorial (“BIS Ex.“) 25 (First Eagle SoGen Funds, Inc. v. Bank for Int’l Settlements, No. 01 Civ. 0087 (RO), 2001 WL 66321, at p. *3 n. 6 (S.D.N.Y., 26 January 2001)).
82 BIS Ex. 50 (First Eagle SoGen Funds, Inc. v. Bank for Int’l Settlements, 252 F.3d p. 604, at p. 607 (2d. Cir. 2001)).
83 BIS Legal Authorities, at 39.
84 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 21.
85 Id., at para. 22.
86 Id., at para. 23 (internal citations omitted).
87 Id., at para. 34.
88 Id., at para. 35.
89 Washington, 18 March 1965, TIAS p. 6090, 575 UNTS p. 159.
90 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 35.
91 Id., at para. 54.
92 Id., at para. 58 (internal citations omitted).
93 Id., at para. 59.
94 Id, at para. 47.
95 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 2-3 (internal citations omitted).
96 Procedural Order No. 9 (On Consent).
97 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 140; BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 70(a).
98 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at para. 114.
99 Id., at para. 138.
100 Id., at para. 147.
101 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 163.
102 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at para. 6.
103 Transcript, at p. 331.
104 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 159-161.
105 Counter-Memorial (“BIS Counter-Memorial“), at para. 51.
106 Id.
107 BIS Memorial Part. Award, at para. 70.
108 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at Relief Requested.
109 See supra fn. 4.
110 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 2-3.
111 Partial Award, at para. 201.
112 Id., at paras. 142-158.
113 This is not to say that it may not realize profits, as was observed by the Swiss Federal Council in 1930. See Partial Award, at para. 117.
114 BIS Press Release, Hague Arbitral Tribunal decision regarding the repurchase of privately held shares of the Bank for International Settlements (25 November 2002).
115 See supra fn. 4.
116 FE Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 28-33; Transcript, at p. 371.
117 See supra para. 19.
118 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 159-161
119 Transcript, at p. 371.
120 Id., at p. 387.
121 Id.
122 Mathieu Memoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 19.
123 Id., at p. 10 (internal citations omitted).
124 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 166.
125 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 15.
126 Partial Award, at para. 171.
127 FE Memorial Part. Award, at para. 170; Mathieu Memoire, at pp. 14-15.
128 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 10.
129 Transcript, at p. 427.
130 BIS Counter-Memorial Part. Award, at para. 7.
131 Id., at para. 133.
132 Convention (II) for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, The Hague, 18 October 1907 (” 1907 Hague Convention“).
133 Partial Award, at para. 204.
134 Code des obligations (Loi fédérale complétant le Code civil suisse, Livre cinquième: Droit des obligations du 30 mars 1911).
135 Transcript, at pp. 373-375.
136 Id., at p. 388.
137 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 19.
138 Transcript, at pp. 395-396.
139 Id., at pp. 432-433.
140 See supra para. 31.
141 Partial Award, at para. 209(2) and (3).
142 See supra fn. 4.
143 See supra paras. 99-101.
144 First Eagle SoGen Funds, Inc. v. Bank for Int'l Settlements, No. 01 Civ. 0087(RO), 2001 WL 1150323 (S.D.N.Y., 28 September 2001).
145 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 1.
146 Id., at para. 2.
147 Id., at para. 3.
148 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 38.
149 Id., at para 5.
150 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 4 (internal citations omitted).
151 Id., at para. 5.
152 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 59.
153 BIS Reply Memorial Part. Award, at para. 17.
154 Id., at para. 19.
155 Id., at paras. 19-20 (some internal citations omitted).
156 Id., at para. 21 (internal citations omitted).
157 Id., at para. 24.
158 Id., at para. 31 (quoting Bank's Statutes, Art. 54(3)).
159 Id., at para. 32.
160 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 64.
161 Id., at para. 77.
162 Id., at paras. 85-88.
163 Klaus Peter Berger, International Economic Arbitration 331 (1993).
164 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at paras. 91-93.
165 Fouchard, Gaillard &Goldman On International Commercial Arbitration, ¶667 (E. Gaillard &J. Savage eds., 1999).
166 FE Counter-Memorial Counterclaim, at para. 97.
167 Bank's Statutes, Art. 54(2) and (3).
168 Supra fn. 56, at Art. II.
169 Supra fn. 55.
170 BIS Memorial, at para. 70.
171 Transcript, at p. 388.
172 FE Reply Memorial Part. Award, at paras. 170-175.
173 Id., at para. 173.
174 Transcript, at pp. 590-600.
175 Id., at p. 388.
176 Waite &Kennedy v. Germany, App. No. 26083/94, 30 ECHR p. 261 (1999).
177 Transcript, at p. 477.
178 Mathieu Mémoire en Demande Seconde Phase, at p. 18; letter from Mr. Mathieu to the Secretary to the Tribunal, copy to the Bank (27 August 2003).
179 Article 33 of the Rules of Procedure provides that: The Tribunal shall fix the costs of arbitration in its award. The term ‘costs’ includes: (a) The fees of the Tribunal to be fixed by the Tribunal itself; (b) The travel and other expenses incurred by the arbitrators; (c) The costs of expert advice and of other assistance required by the Tribunal; (d) [T]he fees and expenses of the Secretary of the Tribunal and the International Bureau.
180 1930 Hague Agreement, Annex XII, at para. 1.
181 Under Article 54(1): If any dispute shall arise between the Bank, on the one side, and any central bank, financial institution, or other bank referred to in the present Statutes, on the other side, or between the Bank and its shareholders, with regard to the interpretation or application of the Statutes of the Bank, the same shall be referred for final decision to the Tribunal provided for by the Hague Agreement of January, 1930.
182 See infra para. 134, H.5.
183 See supra paras. 26, 35(e), 43, and 47.