Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-4thr5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T08:59:19.293Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mondev International Ltd v. United States of America

ICSID (Arbitration Tribunal).  25 September 2000 ; 13 November 2000 ; 25 January 2001 ; 27 February 2001 ; 11 October 2002 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

nafta — Chapter 11 — Claim pursuant to Additional Facility Rules — Place of arbitration — Relevant factors — Joinder of jurisdictional objections to merits — Extent of discovery — Confidentiality

Municipal law — Confidentiality of proceedings — Application of national freedom of information legislation to pleadings, minutes of meetings, orders of Tribunal — Extent and duration of parties’ obligation of confidentiality absent statutory obligations of disclosure — nafta, Article 1126, Annex 1137.4 — Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules, Articles 14, 24, 38, 44

State responsibility — nafta, Articles 1102, 1105, 1110 — Application to acts done before nafta’s entry into force — National court decisions after entry into force — Retrospective effect

Jurisdiction — Proceedings brought under nafta, Article 1116(1) — Whether brought “on behalf of an enterprise” — Failure to rely on Article 1117(1)

Jurisdiction — Termination of an investment — Lapse of contractual option — Bank’s foreclosure on mortgage over investment property — Subsisting claims under national law — Whether an “investment” — Relevance of ownership of national law proprietary rights — nafta, Article 1139

Admissibility — Claim brought more than three years after incidents causing damage — Three-year time-limit — Application — nafta, Article 1116(2)

nafta — Free Trade Commission interpretation — Whether binding on Chapter 11 Tribunal — Whether “interpretation” or “amendment” — Scope of ftc interpretation — Effect on pending proceedings

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — Denial of justice — Whether “new law” applied retrospectively — Procedural decisions — Scope and standard of nafta review

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — “Full protection and security” — Statutory immunity of State agency in respect of intentional torts — Tortious interference with contractual relations — Jury finding implying lack of legitimate regulatory purpose — Whether immunity in breach of Article 1105(1)

State responsibility — nafta, Article 1105(1) — “Full protection and security” — Non-application of trade practices law to regulatory authority

nafta — Chapter 11 — Award of costs and expenses — Extent of Tribunal’s discretion

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2004

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.)