Professor Hess is the author of the chapter of the Heidelberg Report on the interplay between arbitration and the Regulation 44/2001 (“the Regulation”). As such, and quite understandably, he actively promotes the suggestion that the arbitration exception should be deleted from the Regulation.
The Heidelberg proposal has been followed by a Green Paper of the European [...] read more »
Archive for the 'Jurisdiction' Category
« Circulez, il n’y a rien à voir ! ». A Response to Professor Hess
Ecuador Moves to Stay Arbitration Brought by Chevron
I am in Australia in advance of the investment law conference at Sydney Law School at the end of the week, and I took advantage of many plane hours to read the docket in the case pending between Ecuador and Chevron/Texaco Petroleum Company (TexPet) in the Southern District of New York. They repay [...] read more »
Provisional Application of the Energy Charter Treaty: Article 45(1) “Limitation Clause”
On November 30, 2009, an arbitral tribunal issued three interim awards for Yukos Universal Limited, Hulley Limited Enterprises, and Veteran Petroleum Limited v. the Russian Federation under the Energy Charter Treaty (“ECT”). These interim awards addressed the issue of jurisdiction over the Russian Federation, analyzing the Provisional Application under Article 45(1) and (2), labeling the [...] read more »
Possible reinforcement of the negative effect of the “competence-competence” principle in Swiss legislation
The Swiss Parliament is currently contemplating a reinforcement of the negative effect of the “competence-competence” principle in the Swiss legislation. According to a parliamentary initiative, a Swiss court that is seized on the merits and faced with a plea of lack of jurisdiction based on the existence of a valid arbitration agreement should review such [...] read more »
The Question of Admissibility of Claims in Investment Treaty Arbitration
In my last post I questioned whether investor misconduct (such as fraud, illegality and corruption) is invariably a jurisdictional issue. This post focuses on the use of admissibility as a filtering mechanism to screen investor claims. Although it has been suggested by at least one investment treaty tribunal that the concept of admissibility does not [...] read more »
Investor misconduct and investment treaty arbitration: mapping the terrain
The treatment of investor misconduct in investment treaty arbitration raises a series of complex issues. Allegations of investor misconduct (such as fraud, illegality and corruption) can arise in the context of the making of an investment, during its operation, or in the investment treaty claim making process. How should a tribunal address investor misconduct if [...] read more »
Recent Comments