Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T11:17:26.692Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Philippe Gruslin v. Malaysia

ICSID (Sole Arbiter).  27 November 2000 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Jurisdiction — Article 25 of the icsid Convention — Intergovernmental agreement required that investment be in an “approved project” — Mutual fund — Waiver under Rule 27 of the Arbitration Rules — Estoppel

Jurisdiction — Article 25 of the icsid Convention — Intergovernmental agreement required that investment be made in the territory of the Contracting Party

Treaties — Interpretation of intergovernmental agreement — Extrinsic materials not to be used to interpret the agreement — Note verbale a source of confusion rather than clarity

Costs — Claimant appearing in person — Inequality of the position of the parties — Respondent’s successful argument not raised until second round of pleadings — No order for costs

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2002

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.)