Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:05:22.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Belgium: Court of First Instance of Antwerp Decision in Guinea v. Maritime International Nominees Establishment (ICSID Exclusive Jurisdiction; Attachment)*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 24 , Issue 6 , November 1985 , pp. 1639 - 1642
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1985

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.)

Footnotes

*

[Reproduced from the English translation of the Flemish text provided to International Legal Materials by Cadwala der, Wickersham & Taft .

[In May and June of 1985, Maritime International Nominees Establishment (MINE) initiated attachment proceedings against Guinea incourts in Switzerland and Belgium. The basis for the attachments was an award rendered in 1980 by the American Arbitration Association after a hearing in which Guinea did not appear . The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which had ordered AAA arbitration on MINE'Sin correct representation that Guinea had refused to consent to ICSID arbitration , confirmed the award (20 I.L.M. 666 (1981)) . The U.S . Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuitreversed the order confirming the award (21 I.L.M . 1355 (1982) and 22 I.L.M . 86 (1983)) . In May 1984, MINE initiated an arbitration proceeding against Guinea with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.

[Guinea has appeared in the actions in both Belgium and Switzerland. The Belgian court lifted the attachment , holding that the courts in Belgium have no jurisdiction over the dispute because ICSID is jurisdiction is exclusive . MINE is appealing the decision.]

References

* [Reproduced from the English translation of the Flemish text provided to International Legal Materials by Cadwala der, Wickersham & Taft .

[In May and June of 1985, Maritime International Nominees Establishment (MINE) initiated attachment proceedings against Guinea incourts in Switzerland and Belgium. The basis for the attachments was an award rendered in 1980 by the American Arbitration Association after a hearing in which Guinea did not appear . The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which had ordered AAA arbitration on MINE'Sin correct representation that Guinea had refused to consent to ICSID arbitration , confirmed the award (20 I.L.M. 666 (1981)) . The U.S . Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuitreversed the order confirming the award (21 I.L.M . 1355 (1982) and 22 I.L.M . 86 (1983)) . In May 1984, MINE initiated an arbitration proceeding against Guinea with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.

[Guinea has appeared in the actions in both Belgium and Switzerland. The Belgian court lifted the attachment , holding that the courts in Belgium have no jurisdiction over the dispute because ICSID is jurisdiction is exclusive . MINE is appealing the decision.]