Page:12
Acknowledgements »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
4 Choice of Law »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
Article V of the Claims Settlement Declaration provided the Tribunal with broad discretion in its choices of applicable law. The Tribunal shall decide all cases on the basis of respect for law, applying such choice of law rules and principles of commercial and international law as the Tribunal determines to be applicable, taking into account relevant usages of the trade, contract provisions and changed circumstances. The freedom accorded the Tribunal by this provision inspired the Tribunal to a creative and eclectic approach—one might almost conclude a variety of...
13 Claims and Disputes Between the Two Governments »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
This Chapter summarizes the decisions of the Tribunal on two special types of cases: disputes between Iran and the United States as to the interpretation of or compliance with the terms of the Algiers Declarations and the large Iranian contractual claim against the United States Department of Defence designated Case No. B1. As noted in the Introduction, jurisdiction over these cases was reserved to the Full Tribunal. The General Declaration provided, in paragraph 16, for jurisdiction over disputes submitted by Iran as to whether the United States has complied with...
Contents »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
6 Contractual Issues »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
Claims arising out of contractual relationships constituted a substantial part of the total claims presented to the Tribunal. Included were contracts between agencies of the two governments, contracts between private persons and a government agency, and contracts between private persons where one government became liable for the debts of one of the parties by virtue of the Algiers Declarations and the exercise by that government of control over that party.1 The great variety of contracts, parties, and circumstances gave the Tribunal the opportunity to address many...
9 Currency »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
Relatively few issues concerning currency arose in cases decided by the Tribunal. While many contracts between American claimants and Iran provided for payments in Iranian rials, the 1981 Algiers Declarations established a security account in U.S. dollars for the payment of all claims against Iran.1 Consequently, as Awards by the Tribunal against Iran were all to be paid in dollars, with a few exceptions, the awarded amounts were stated in dollars.2 Thus, the principal currency question facing the Tribunal was the choice of the rate of exchange for debts due in...
Annex I Declaration of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
Declaration of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria concerning the Settlement of Claims by the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
7 Evidentiary Issues »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The Algiers Declarations make no reference to rules of evidence, except as may be implicit in the general directive of Article V of the Claims Settlement Declaration that the Tribunal ‘shall decide all cases on the basis of respect for law’. The Tribunal Rules, however, deal with the question of evidence in Article 24,1 which states: In practice, the Tribunal was conscious of the practical difficulties facing the parties in finding and producing evidence. Most of the claims had arisen many years prior to the time evidence was to be presented to the Tribunal. The...
5 Expropriations, Takings, and Deprivations of Property »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The Islamic Revolution that toppled the Shah and, in February 1979, saw the formation of the Islamic Republic gave rise, directly or indirectly, to most, if not all, of the expropriation claims presented to the Tribunal. That there should be many such claims is scarcely surprising, as the Revolution brought about profound social changes in Iran, including the exodus of numerous Iranian and foreign businessmen and technical experts and the cessation of certain businesses. Moreover, the new Islamic Regime was anxious to reduce foreign influence in Iran, particularly...
Index »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
3 Interim Measures of Relief »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The Algiers Declarations make no direct reference to interim measures that the Tribunal might order, but Article III, paragraph 2, of the Claims Settlement Declaration makes an indirect reference by providing that the Tribunal ‘shall conduct its business in accordance with the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) except to the extent modified by the parties or by the Tribunal to ensure that this agreement can be carried out’. The relevant provision of the UNCITRAL Rules—which is unchanged in the Tribunal Rules—is...
Introduction »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The object of this book is to preserve and to make accessible the substantial body of Awards and Decisions rendered by the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal during the years since its establishment in 1981. The jurisprudence of this extraordinary tribunal is of much broader interest than simply to the parties before it and the two Governments that created it. While copies of its hundreds of Awards and Decisions may individually be purchased from the Tribunal and have been or are being published in the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Reports (‘Iran-U.S....
1 Jurisdictional Issues »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
Every tribunal has some limits to its jurisdiction, and international tribunals frequently have more limited grants of jurisdiction than domestic tribunals. Thus, it should not be surprising that the decisions of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal with respect to the extent of its jurisdiction were numerous and that a great many claims and counterclaims submitted to it were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The Tribunal’s jurisdiction was in some respects quite broad, particularly in the types of obligations covered, in the acceptance of jurisdiction over...
The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the Tribunal »
George H Aldrich
Annex III Members of the Tribunal »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
12 Miscellaneous Issues »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
This Chapter will review the Decisions by the Tribunal on certain issues that could not be analyzed adequately in the preceeding chapters and are so limited that they do not require a chapter of their own. One result of the Iranian Revolution was the abrupt and massive departure from Iran of foreign nationals, including Americans. Perhaps as many as 45,000 Americans left Iran between November 1978 and November 1979. Many of the small claims presented to the Tribunal were based, at least in part, upon allegations that losses resulted from such departures and that...
11 Procedural Issues »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The Claims Settlement Declaration provided in Article I for efforts to settle claims covered by Article II during a six-month period, following which claims could be submitted to the Tribunal. As authorized by Article I, that period was later extended by three months, so that the first day upon which claims could be filed was 20 October 1981. Paragraph 4 of Article III of the Declaration imposed a deadline for the filing of claims of one year after the entry into force of the Declaration or six months after the appointment of the President of the Tribunal,...
2 Standing and Admissibility »
From: The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: An Analysis of the Decisions of the TribunalGeorge H Aldrich
The Claims Settlement Declaration makes no reference either to the ‘standing’ of claimants to present and pursue their claims or to the ‘admissibility’ or ‘non-admissibility’ of claims. Nevertheless, the concepts of standing and admissibility were reflected in a few Awards. In general, the Tribunal ruled that a claimant—or counterclaimant—lacked standing to present or recover on a claim only when the evidence indicated that the claimant did not ‘own’ the claim, in the sense that any proceeds of the claim rightfully belonged to someone else. Thus, an Iranian...
Page:12
