No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Investment Treaty Arbitration (ITA) website (visited Jan. 31, 2011) http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/AndersonvCostaRicaAward19May2010.pdf.
1 Anderson v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/07/3, Award (May 19, 2010), available at http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/AndersonvCostaRicaAward19-May2010.pdf.
2 The tribunal was composed of Sandra Morelli Rico (president), Jeswald Salacuse, and Raul Vinuesa.
3 Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment between the Republic of Costa Rica and Canada, Mar. 18, 1998 (entered into force Sept. 29, 1999) [hereinafter BIT].
4 The claim was filed under the ICSID Additional Facility Rules, which allow the settlement of legal disputes that are not within the jurisdiction of the Centre. An Award rendered under the Additional Facility Rules is subject to judicial review under the law of the seat of arbitration.
5 The fund manager remains fugitive at the time the award was rendered.
6 See BIT art. I(h).
7 Anderson, ¶ 47.
8 Id. ¶ 52.
9 The Tribunal emphasized that “each claimant” must meet this requirement.
10 Anderson, ¶ 56.
11 World Duty Free Co. Ltd v. Kenya, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/7, Award (Sept. 25 2006).
12 The principle that one cannot benefit from one’s own illegal act.
13 Anderson, ¶ 58.
14 Posting of Mark Kantor, http://www.transnational-disputemanagement.com/ogemid/aleach (Jan. 4, 2011) (on file with author).
15 2010 FCPA Enforcement Index, FCPA Blog (Jan. 3, 2011, 7:02 AM), http://www.fcpablog.com/blog/2011/1/3/2010-fcpa-enforcement-index.html.