Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:10:12.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sylvania Technical Systems, Inc. v. Islamic Republic of Iran

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Monroe Leigh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 80 , Issue 2 , April 1986 , pp. 365 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1986

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.)

References

1 AWD 180–64–1, slip op. at 21.

2 Id. at 31–32.

3 Id. at 32–33.

4 Id. at 36.

5 Id.

6 Id.

7 For background information on the Algiers Accords and the establishment of the Tribunal, see 77 AJIL 642 (1983).

8 Slip op. at 37.

9 Id. at 37–38. The sum of $265,000 was the amount claimed for legal costs relating to claimant’s action before the Tribunal. The total amount claimed for legal costs, including fees for prosecuting the related case in U.S. court, was $830,093.76.

10 Holtzmann stated that in his view, claimant’s costs of litigation in the United States should not be granted because, inter alia, such costs are not covered by Articles 38 and 40 of the Tribunal’s Rules.

11 Separate Opinion of Holtzmann, Howard M., AWD 180-64-1, slip op. at 7–8 Google Scholar.

12 The Chamber observed that in the past, the Tribunal has never awarded compound interest. AWD 180-64-1, slip op. at 31. Indeed, in one of the cases cited, the Tribunal stated that it is a “settled” rule of international law that compound interest is not allowable. Reynolds, R. J. Tobacco Co. and Iran, AWD 145–35–3 (Aug. 6, 1984)Google Scholar (Chamber 3).

13 See, e.g., International Schools Services, Inc. and Iranian Copper Industries Co., AWD 194-111-1 (Oct. 10, 1985) (Chamber 1) (awarding interest payment of 10%).