Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation
Siemens AG v Argentina, Award and Separate Opinion, ICSID Case No ARB/02/8, IIC 227 (2007), 6th February 2007, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]

Reporter(s)

Okechukwu Chima Ejims

Siemens AG v Argentina, Award and Separate Opinion, ICSID Case No ARB/02/8, IIC 227 (2007), 6th February 2007, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]

From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved.date: 19 October 2019

Whether Argentina’s breach of contract with SITS amounted to a violation of the Treaty on the Mutual Protection and Promotion of Investments (Federal Republic of Germany/Argentina) (Germany-Argentina BIT).

Whether the measures taken by Argentina were tantamount to expropriation.

Whether, under Article 4(2) of the Germany-Argentina BIT, the findings of the tribunal were subject to judicial review by ordinary domestic courts.

Whether contract law was relevant for the purposes of determining whether expropriation had occurred.

Whether the intent of Argentina to expropriate or only the expropriatory effects of Argentina’s measures need to be considered to ascertain whether expropriation had occurred, and if so, whether the intent conformed to the treaty requirements.

Whether the obligation to treat an investment fairly and equitably referred to the minimum standard of treatment of aliens under customary international law as set out in Neer v Mexico, or whether the obligation required the state to meet a higher standard of conduct more in consonance with the objective of the BIT, and if so, whether Argentina breached this standard.

Whether the provision of ‘[full] protection and legal [security]’ referred to physical security or to security in a wider sense, such as protecting the investor against the unpredictability of legal and business environments, and if so, whether Argentina breached this standard.

Whether breach of the ‘arbitrary standard’ under Article 3(1) (2) of the BIT required a showing of bad faith and intent, and if so, whether Argentina breached this standard.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.