Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:56:25.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

SGS Société Générale de Surveillance SA v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan

ICSID (Arbitration Tribunal).  16 October 2002 ; 19 December 2002 ; 06 August 2003 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Arbitration — ICSID Convention, Article 41 — Duty of tribunal to judge its own competence

Provisional measures — ICSID Convention — Article 47– Right to access international adjudication — Whether right can be constrained by decision of national court

Procedure — Disqualification challenge to arbitration tribunal member — ICSID Convention, Article 57– ICSID Arbitration Rules, Rule 9(4)

Arbitrators — Composition of arbitration tribunal — Disqualification challenge to member — Impending publication by member on issues raised in claim — Continuing retainer of member’s law firm by United Mexican States — Appointment of member’s law firm in unrelated NAFTA case in which counsel for Respondent was appointed President of Tribunal — No facts to lead to reasonable inference that member will favour Respondent on basis of an understanding between member and counsel for Respondent — Challenge rejected

Interpretation — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) — Interpretation of “investment” — Distinguishable from an ordinary commercial transaction

Treaties — Bilateral investment treaty — Investment broadly defined under treaty — Whether contract involved a “claim for money” — Whether contract in the nature of a public law concession

Jurisdiction — Characterization of claims — Degree of scrutiny in jurisdictional phase of Claimant’s claims — Claims relating to breach of contract and breach of treaty

Jurisdiction — Forum selection clause — Contractual arbitration clause covering all disputes arising from the contract — Relation to bilateral investment treaty and ICSID arbitration — Whether claims relating to breach of contract and breach of treaty are distinct — Whether contractual arbitration clause includes jurisdiction over treaty claims — Whether ICSID has exclusive jurisdiction over breach of treaty claims — Whether ICSID has concurrent jurisdiction over breach of contract claims

Treaties — Bilateral investment treaty — Interpretation of Article 11 of Pakistan — Switzerland BIT — Whether elevating alleged contractual breaches into treaty violations — Consequences of such an interpretation — Whether clear evidence existed of an intention to produce such consequences

Jurisdiction — Estoppel — Absence of a “fork-in-the-road” provision — Whether the Claimant had made similar claims in another forum — Whether the Claimant had held out that it would not make similar claims

Jurisdiction — Waiver — Submission of claims to another forum — Whether submission was reserved — Delay in raising possibility of ICSID arbitration

Jurisdiction — Lis pendens — Whether causes of action identical

Jurisdiction — Requirement to consult under bilateral investment treaty — Whether a condition precedent to jurisdiction

Jurisdiction — Terms of contract — Whether tribunal can decide factual issues with respect to the contract which is subject to another body’s jurisdiction — Relationship between contractual claims and treaty claims — Distinct nature of international law standards

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2005

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.)