This ICSID arbitration is, at its essence, a case about water politics. Azurix claims that Argentina has violated obligations owed to Azurix under the 1991 Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment between the Argentine Republic and the United States of America (hereinafter “the BIT”), international law and Argentine law in respect of Azurix's investment in a utility which distributes drinking water and treats and disposes of sewerage water in … Azurix Corp v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/12, Award, 14 July 2006 . If the claimant provides more than one valuation of damages claimed, the highest of these amounts is recorded. para. Google Scholar * Consultant, Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP. This refers to the economic sector to which the investment at issue allegedly belongs. Link to Italaw’s case page This refers to the current status of the original arbitration proceedings. Applicable IIA © Copyright - UNCTAD Division on Investment and Enterprise. These may include links to websites of arbitral/administering institutions, governments, international organisations, specialised reporting services (including subscription-based), media and other resources. Azurix claims that Argentina has violated obligations owed to Azurix under the 1991 Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment between the Argentine Republic and the United States of America (hereinafter “the BIT”), international law and Argentine law in respect of Azurix’s investment in a utility which distributes drinking water and treats and disposes of sewerage water in … Whenever possible, information about amounts claimed and awarded is obtained from primary sources such as the arbitration documents. We welcome any additional information or clarifications on specific cases as well as suggestions to improve the Navigator. If you are a subscriber, please Login to view additional case details. The Italaw.com portal offers a wide collection of case documentation for many investor-State disputes. Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic. See case mapped in Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide. ARB/02/7) English June 5, 2007 Annulment rejected CDC Group plc v. Republic of Seychelles (ICSID Case No. Azurix Corp. v. Argentina (ICSID Case No. By Elizabeth Whitsitt 2 October 2009 . Decisions, judgments and/or awards rendered in the course of follow-on (post-award) proceedings, as well as any individual opinions appended to them, are recorded. US$ 665 million in damages plus interest. The International Arbitration Society established the Arbitration Database in May 2008. Additional notes: It makes available not only the main arbitral decisions, but also procedural orders, parties’ submissions, expert opinions and other types of documents. The tribunal reasoned that ‘when the terms protection and security are qualified by full and no other adjective or explanation, they extend, in their ordinary meaning, the … Azurix v. Argentina (1) You are not logged in. The full case name is recorded as it appears in the official case documents and as it is registered at the administering institution if applicable (listing the claimants in alphabetical order). Case Details . AES Corporation and Tau Power B.V. v. Republic of Kazakhstan, ICSID Case No. In some cases, the approximate amount may be recorded to give a broad indication of the dispute’s magnitude. Azurix v. Argentina (2) You are not logged in. • Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded): the arbitral tribunal found that the respondent State committed one or more breaches of the applicable IIA but did not award monetary compensation or non-pecuniary relief to the claimant investor. On November 13, 2006, the Argentine Republic (“Argentina”) filed with the Secretary–General of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) an application in writing requesting the annulment of the Award, rendered by the Tribunal in the arbitration proceeding between Azurix Corp. (“Azurix”) and Argentina of July 14, 2006. • Technical assistance: delivering trainings, seminars and workshops; conducting IIA and model BIT reviews; offering ad-hoc advice to strengthen the capacity of beneficiaries in handling the complexities of the IIA regime, The summary of the dispute describes in very general terms the conduct allegedly in breach of IIA obligations as argued by the claimant (non-exhaustive). 8 Dec 2003. Composition of tribunal The company owned and operated facilities in North America (mainly Canada), Europe, and South America. (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o), 106 Ibid., para. Summary of the dispute Claims arising out of Argentina's alleged interference with the tariff regime applicable to claimant's investment, as well as other alleged breaches of obligations under a water concession agreement. This includes discontinuance as a result of non-payment of arbitration fees, in order to pursue litigation in another forum, or for any other reason (including for unknown reasons). • CRCICA: Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration For proceedings that end in a settlement, the amount of compensation that the State agreed to pay to the claimant under the terms of settlement (if known) is recorded in this section. ARB/01/12, Award, 14 Jul. Claudia Frutos-Peterson Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic. Azurix Corp. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. Azurix v. Argentina represents the first case in which and international arbitral tribunal decided on the merit of a disputed water privatization. 30. 14 Jul 2006. ISDS Navigator On August 18, 2015, the chamber A of the Buenos Aires Commercial Court of Appeals (the “Court of Appeals”) decided on the case involving CCI – Compañía de Concesiones de Infraestructura S.A. (“CCI”) and the Republic of Peru (the “CCI Case”) in a groundbreaking decision that represents the first judicial precedent regarding the … m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m) , Expert Opinion of Prof. Comadira (not public), Expert Opinion of Prof. Fernandez (not public), Expert Opinion of Dr. Solomoni (not public), See case mapped in Subject Navigator on Investor-State LawGuide, See discussion and analysis of the case on IAReporter, Decision on the Argentine Republic’s Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award (English), Decision on the Argentine Republic’s Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award (Spanish), Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Argentine Republic (English), Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Argentine Republic (Spanish). The disputing party (i.e. Azurix Corp. is a water services company, headquartered in Houston, Texas. Azurix is known in particular for operating in Argentina, where in June 1999 it bid $438m to win a 30-year concession covering two of the three regions of the Buenos Aires Province (excluding the Buenos Aires city concession, which is run by Suez). On November 13, 2006, the Argentine Republic (“Argentina”) filed with the Secretary-General of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) an application in writing requesting the annulment of the Award, rendered by the Tribunal in the arbitration proceeding between Azurix Corp. (“Azurix”) and Argentina on July 14, 2006. 46. ARB/01/12) Annulment Proceeding Decision on the Argentine Republic's Request for a Continued Stay of Enforcement of the Award Claudia Frutos-Peterson. The company owned and operated facilities in North America (mainly Canada), Europe, and South America.In 2007, Azurix was awarded a $165 million claim against the government of Argentina by an international arbitral tribunal; the company is currently involved in a dispute over Argentina's refusal to pay the claim. "Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No ARB/01/12, (2004) 43 ILM 262, IIC 23 (2003), despatched 8th December 2003, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]" published on by Oxford University Press. • an international arbitration between an investor and a State; These are the arbitral rules in accordance with which the proceedings are conducted. • Settled: the disputing parties settled the case and the arbitral proceedings were discontinued for that reason. ARB/01/12. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules), the parties may request any arbitral institution to administer their case (e.g. ARB/07/22, Award, 23 September 2010, paragraph 9.3.40. Information about breaches found is primarily derived from the arbitral decisions. • ICSID resubmission proceedings. For example, in a case where a final award has been rendered but it is later subject to a follow-on proceeding (e.g. If you are not a subscriber, you can contact us for a rate quote at subscribe@iareporter.com. Alternatively, you can sign up to receive free email headlines here. Otherwise, it is derived from other publicly available sources that are deemed reliable. Case ID: ICSID Case No. //-->