Necessity in international investment arbitration an unnecessary split of opinions in recent ICSID cases? Comments on CMS v. Argentina and LG&E v. Argentina

Journal of World Investment and Trade

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 191-214

  Reinisch, August ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85051858459     PISSN: 16607112     EISSN: 22119000     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. I LGFrE Energy Corp., LGfrE Capital Corp., LGF7E International Inc. v. The Argentine Republic, IcsiD Case No. ARB/02/1, Decision on Liability, 3 October 2006, available at http://ita.law.uvic.ca/docurnents/LGEArgentinaLiability.pdf. See also G. Falkof, 'State of Necessity' Dçfence Accepted in LGFrE v. Argentina Ie51/) Tribunal, 3 Transnational Dispute Management, Issue 5 (December 2006), available at http://www.transnationaldispute-management.com/wclcome.html.
2. Article XI Argentina-US BIT (1994), signed 14 November 1991; entered into force 20 October 1994; available at http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite/iia/docs/bits/argentina-us.pdf.
3. O n necessity and investment arbitration see also A. K. Bjorklund, Emergency Exceptions to Intemational Obligations in the Realm of Foreign Investment: The State of Necessity as a Circumstance Preduding Wrongfulness, in P. Muchlinski/F. Ortino (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law (forthcoming 2007) available at http://www.ila-hq.org/pdflForeign%20Invesrment/Bjorklund%20Emergency%20Exceptions. pdf.
4. For the cases currently pending see http://www.worldbank.org/icsid/cases/pending.htm; in a number of cases Decisions on Jurisdictions have already been made and in some instances Awards were rendered, see A Fs Corporation v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARH/02/17, Decision on Jurisdiction, 26 April 2005
5. R. Doak Bishop/R. Aguirre Luzi, Investment Claims: First Lessons from A qentina, in: T. Weiler (ed.). International Investment Law and Arbitration 425 (2005)
6. C. I. Suarez Anzorena, Multiplicity of Claims under BITS and the Argentine Case, in: F. Ortino/A. Sheppard/H. Warner (eds.), Investment Treaty Law 37 (2006).
7. Serbian Loans Case, 1929, P.C.I. J., Scries A, No. 20
8. Sociiti Comrnerciale de Belgique Case, 1939, P.C.I.j., Series A/B, No. 78.
9. t46 See the discussion on 'appeals and challenges to investment treaty awards: is it time for an international appellate system?' in: F. Ortino/A. Sheppard/H. Warner (eds.), Investment Treaty Law 3-147(2006).
10. SCS v. Philippine, supra footnote 142, para, 97.