Whether the claim manifestly lacked legal merit.
Whether a claimant could be considered a foreign investor under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (‘ICSID Convention’) and whether there were additional requirements to being a qualified investor under the Energy Charter Treaty (‘ECT’) and the ICSID Convention.
At what point in time must foreign control have been established to enable a party to make a claim under the ICSID Convention.
Whether foreign control over a commercial entity could be lost merely by having the status of being in bankruptcy proceedings and whether this was a matter of national law or international law.
Whether the notions of lis pendens, res judicata and collateral estoppel would have applied to a situation where an arbitration case had been commenced by a majority shareholder of the claimant party based on the same grounds.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full
to access all content.