Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- PART I International Court of Justice
- PART II International arbitration
- 12 A BIT about ICSID
- 13 The influence of bilateral investment treaties on customary international law
- 14 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty: an exercise in the regressive development of international law
- 15 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty and denial of justice in international law
- 16 Anti-suit injunctions in international arbitration: an overview
- 17 The law applicable in international arbitration: application of public international law
- 18 The validity of an arbitral award rendered by a truncated tribunal
- 19 The authority of a truncated tribunal
- 20 Injunction of arbitral proceedings and truncation of the tribunal
- 21 Public policy and arbitral procedure
- 22 The creation and operation of an International Court of Arbitral Awards
- 23 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Aramco arbitrate the Onassis Agreement
- 24 The Southern Bluefin Tuna case
- 25 A celebration of the United Nations New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
- 26 Does the consent of the Contracting Parties govern the requirement of an “investment” as specified in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention?
- PART III Miscellaneous
- Collected publications, judicial opinions and book reviews
- Index
20 - Injunction of arbitral proceedings and truncation of the tribunal
from PART II - International arbitration
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 September 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- PART I International Court of Justice
- PART II International arbitration
- 12 A BIT about ICSID
- 13 The influence of bilateral investment treaties on customary international law
- 14 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty: an exercise in the regressive development of international law
- 15 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty and denial of justice in international law
- 16 Anti-suit injunctions in international arbitration: an overview
- 17 The law applicable in international arbitration: application of public international law
- 18 The validity of an arbitral award rendered by a truncated tribunal
- 19 The authority of a truncated tribunal
- 20 Injunction of arbitral proceedings and truncation of the tribunal
- 21 Public policy and arbitral procedure
- 22 The creation and operation of an International Court of Arbitral Awards
- 23 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Aramco arbitrate the Onassis Agreement
- 24 The Southern Bluefin Tuna case
- 25 A celebration of the United Nations New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
- 26 Does the consent of the Contracting Parties govern the requirement of an “investment” as specified in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention?
- PART III Miscellaneous
- Collected publications, judicial opinions and book reviews
- Index
Summary
On May 4, 1999, two arbitral tribunals sitting in Jakarta under the chairmanship of Jan Paulsson rendered parallel Final Awards in the cases of Himpurna California Energy Ltd. (Bermuda) v. PT (Persero) Perusahaan Listruik Negara (Indonesia) [“PLN”] and Patuha Power Ltd. (Bermuda) v. PT (Persero) Perusahaan Listruik Negara (Indonesia) [“PLN”]. The claims arose under energy sales contracts concluded in 1994 for the supply of electricity to PLN from geothermal fields in Java to be developed at great expense by the applicants, both of which are owned by a California company. The contracts committed PLN to pay for the electricity over a period of thirty years in US dollars. The claimants alleged that PLN had breached and repudiated the contracts. PLN denied breach and among other defenses claimed that performance had been suspended as a result of non-discriminatory governmental measures taken in response to unprecedented economic adversity, including the dramatic devaluation of the Indonesian rupiah which made it impossible to discharge dollar-denominated obligations. The tribunals ruled that PLN had breached the sales contracts, justifying their termination; and in consequence of its breach, PLN was ordered to pay sums that would largely compensate the claimants for their investments but accord less than 10 percent of the amounts claimed for lost profits. The Awards were unanimous on the issue of liability; a majority of President Paulsson and Mr. Setiawan prevailed on the issue of damages.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Justice in International LawFurther Selected Writings, pp. 212 - 219Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
- 1
- Cited by