 |
| Subscriber Login: |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tell us about an award |
| Know of a new award? Tell
us about it. |
|
|
|
| You are here:
Home > Awards & Decisions by Host State
|
Awards and Decisions listed by Host State
To display an award or decision, click on the linked title.
|
| |
|
|
| < back to country list |
|
|
Number of search results per page 10 | 25 | 50 | 75
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Awards and Decisions: Argentina |
Displaying 1 to 10 of 72 |
 |
| 1. |
AES Corporation v Argentina, Decision on jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/02/17; IIC 4 (2005); 12 ICSID Rep 308, signed 26 April 2005  (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Preliminary proceedings – Waiting period—negotiations – Conduct of proceedings – Precedent – Claims – Calvo clause – Investment – Investment defined in treaties – Investor – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Measure – Treaties, interpretation
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the Tribunal of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (‘ICSID’) had jurisdiction to hear
the case under Article 25 of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other
States
2. Whether earlier decisions on jurisdiction in the Argentinean cases under the same Bi Lateral Investment Treaty had any relevance
or were precedents.
3. The extent to which specific contract forum selection clauses precluded ICSID arbitration.
|
| 2. |
AWG Group Ltd v Argentina, Procedural Order No 2, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 281 (2006), signed 03 August 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings
|
| 3. |
AWG Group Ltd v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, Ad hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 21 (2006), signed 03 August 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Preliminary proceedings – Admissibility – Claims – Investment – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Treaties, interpretation
|
| 4. |
Aguas Argentinas SA and ors v Argentina, Procedural Order No 1 Concerning the Discontinuance of Proceedings with Respect to
Aguas Argentinas SA, ICSID Case No ARB/03/19, IIC 230 (2006), signed 14 April 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Procedural orders
|
| 5. |
Aguas Argentinas SA and ors v Argentina, Order in Response to a Petition for Transparency and Participation as Amicus Curiae,
ICSID Case No ARB/03/19, IIC 229 (2005), signed 19 May 2005 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Procedural orders
|
| 6. |
Aguas Provinciales de Santa Fe SA and ors v Argentina, Order in Response to a Petition for Participation as Amicus Curiae,
ICSID Case No ARB/03/17; IIC 234 (2006), signed 17 March 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Conduct of proceedings – Third party proceedings – Treaties, interpretation – Authority of previous decisions (precedents)
Core issue(s): 1. Whether, in the absence of all parties' consent, a non-party may attend and participate in the hearings of the case.
2. Whether the tribunal has the power to accept and consider amicus curiae submissions by non-parties.
3. The circumstances under which such power to accept amicus curiae submissions should be exercised.
4. Whether, in the absence of all parties' consent, an amicus curiae may have access to documents and information in the case.
|
| 7. |
Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Application for Annulment, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12; IIC 388 (2009), despatched 01 September 2009 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
|
| 8. |
Azurix Corp v Argentina, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12; IIC 24 (2006), signed 23 June 2006 despatched 14 July 2006 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Applicable law – Customary international law – Claims – Concession agreements – Umbrella clause – Investment – Standards of treatment – Fair and equitable treatment standard – Full protection and security – Transparency – Expropriation – Remedies and costs – Costs and expenses – Interest, compound/simple – Valuation
Core issue(s): 1. Whether the standard of fair and equitable treatment under the Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection
of Investment (14 November 1991) Senate Treaty Doc 103–02, entered into force 20 October 1994 (“Argentina–US BIT’, ‘BIT’)
entails obligations for Argentina which are additional to those required by the minimum standard of treatment of aliens under
customary international law.
2. Whether the standard of ‘full protection and security’ merely provides for the guarantee of the physical security of the investor;
or whether it is broader and protects investors against the instabilities of legal and business environment.
3. Whether the arbitrary impairment standard under Article II(2)(c) of the BIT requires a showing of bad faith, or whether it
is an objective standard.
4. Whether Argentina's actions were tantamount to expropriation.
5. Whether the failure of Argentina's water regulatory authority to publish its regulations was a breach of Argentina's obligation
to act transparently under Article II(7) of the BIT.
6. Whether Argentina breached Article II(2)(c) of the BIT (umbrella clause) which required it to ‘observe any obligations that
it had entered into with regard to investments’ when there was no direct contractual relationship between Argentina and Azurix.
7. Whether the standard/measure of compensation for expropriation cases, involving fair market value, could be invoked in a case
involving breaches of non–expropriation standards of treatment, such as fair and equitable treatment.
|
| 9. |
Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12; IIC 23 (2003), despatched 08 December 2003 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
Keyword(s): Parallel proceedings – Fork in the road clause – Waiver – Applicable law – Claims – Calvo clause – Investment – Investor – Nationality of investor – Ownership – Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals – Treaties, interpretation – Pacta sunt servanda
Core issue(s): 1. Whether an exclusive forum selection clause and a waiver of jurisdiction clause in the underlying investment contract would
prevent Azurix from bringing a claim before the Tribunal based on the breach of the Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement
and Protection of Investment (Argentina–United States) (14 November 1991) Senate Treaty Doc 103–02, entered into force 20
October 1994 (‘Argentina–US BIT’) (‘BIT’).
2. Whether submission of contractual aspects of the dispute to Argentina's domestic courts triggered the fork–in–the–road clause
of the BIT, thereby preventing Azurix from pursuing the available remedies under the BIT.
3. Whether Azurix has jus standi under the BIT and international law to bring an indirect claim for the damages suffered by ABA,
the Argentinean company in which Azurix had an indirect share ownership.
|
| 10. |
Azurix Corp v Argentina, Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, IIC 317 (2007), signed 28 December 2007 (free)
Content set: Awards & Decisions
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Sign Up for
Alerts |
|
| Receive free
updates on Investment Claims by
email or RSS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
