Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-5pczc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T08:38:43.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic

ICSID (Arbitration Tribunal).  14 July 2006 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

State responsibility — Responsibility of Respondent for actions and omissions of its political subdivision, the Province — Privatization of water supply and sewerage services of Province — Whether political subdivision of Respondent acting in exercise of public authority or as party to contract

Treaties — Bilateral investment treaty — 1991 Argentina-US Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) — Whether Respondent breaching standards in BIT — Whether established facts of dispute evidencing action on part of Province in exercise of public authority or as party to contract — Whether Respondent breaching Articles IV(1), II(2)(a), II(2)(b), II(2)(c) and II(7) of BIT

Expropriation — Whether impact on Claimant’s investment attributable to Province’s actions to extent that actions amount to expropriation — Whether legitimate measure serving public purpose giving rise to compensation claim — Whether time limit under international law for measures constituting creeping expropriation — Contractual breaches — Sovereign authority — Whether Respondent breaching Article IV(1) of BIT

Fair and equitable treatment — Interpretation — Customary international law — Bad faith or malicious intention — Province’s termination of Concession Agreement — Whether breach of fair and equitable treatment standard — Whether Respondent breaching Article II(2)(a) of BIT — Whether Respondent also breaching standard of full protection and security under Article II(2)(a) of BIT

Bilateral investment treaty — Duty to publish regulations — Duty to observe obligations with regard to investments — Contractual claims — Claimant not party to Concession Agreement — Whether Respondent breaching Articles II(7) and II(2)(c) of BIT

Arbitrary measures — Whether Respondent taking arbitrary measures impairing Claimant’s use and enjoyment of investment — Whether Respondent breaching Article II(2)(b) of BIT

Compensation — Fair market value — Actual investment — Book value — Independent and well-informed third party — Contractual claims — Amount owed to subsidiary not recoverable — Consequential damages — Interest — Costs

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)