No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID): Maffezini v. Spain (Award of the Tribunal)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Judicial and Similar Decisions
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 2001
References
End notes
* This document was reproduced and reformatted from the text appearing at the ICSID website (visited August 14, 2001) http://www.worldbank.org/icsid.
1 Agreement between Argentina and Spain of October 3, 1991. Hereinafter cited as the Argentine-Spain BIT.
2 Agreement between Chile and Spain of October 2, 1991. Hereinafter cited as the Chile-Spain BIT.
3 Under Article 38 of the ICSID Convention and Rule 4 of the Arbitration Rules, if the Tribunal is not yet constituted within 90 days after the notice of registration of the request has been dispatched, the Chairman of ICSID's Administrative Council shall, at the request of either party, and after consulting both parties as far as possible, appoint the arbitrator or arbitrators not yet appointed and designate an arbitrator to be the President of the Tribunal.
4 Law No. 30/1992, November 26, 1992, as amended, text in Luis Martín Rebollo: Leyes Administrative, 1999, at 369.
5 Luis Martín Rebollo: “Estudio Preliminar y Esquema de la Organización de la Administración General del Estado y de la Estructura Orgánica Básica de los diferentes Ministerios,” in op. cit., supra note 4, 636, 639.
6 Ibid., at 639-640.
7 Ibid., at 679.
8 See in particular Article 2.2 of Law No. 30/1992, and the notes to this Article by Martín Rebollo, op. cit. supra note 4, at 385.
9 Martín Rebollo, op. cit., supra note 4, at 679.
10 Ibid., at 679.
11 Law No. 6/1997, April 14, 1997, in Martín Rebollo, op. cit., supra note 4, at 677, Disposición Adicional Duodécima, at 713.
12 José Martí Pellón: El capital inversión en España 1999, Asociación Española de Capital Inversión, 1999, at 24. For a description of “XesGalicia S.G.E.C.R., S.A.,” see Ibid., at 197.
13 Ibid., at 39-40.
14 Ibid., at 40
15 Ibid., at 45-46.
16 Ibid., at 30-31.
17 See for example the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Espoo, February 25, 1991, and see generally Philippe Sands: Principles of International Environmental Law, Vol. 1, 1995, Chapter 15: “Environmental Impact Assessment,” 579-595.
18 Constitución Española, December 27, 1978, Boletín Oficial del Estado, No. 311. December 29, 1978, Article 45.
19 As translated in European Court of Human Rights, Case López Ostra v. Spain, Case No. 41/1993/436/515, December 9, 1994, paragraph 23.
20 Ramón Martín Mateo: “The Environmental Law System,” in N. S. J. Koeman: Environmental Law in Europe, 1999, Chapter 15: “Environmental Law in Spain,” 497, at 497-499.
21 Law No. 20, May 14, 1986, as discussed in Martín Mateo, loc. cit., supra note 20, at 504.
22 On the Spanish environmental legislation see generally Martín Mateo, loc. cit., supra note 20, and Carlos de Miguel Perales: “Practical Questions of Environmental Law,” in Koeman, op. cit. and chapter cit., supra note 20, 508.
23 EEC Directive 85/337, June 27, 1985, Official Journal of the European Community, No. L175/40, July 5, 1985.
24 Real Decreto Legislativo No. 1302/1986, June 28, 1986, Boleti'n Oficial del Estado, No. 155, June 30, 1986, 23733.
25 De Miguel Perales, loc. cit., supra note 22, at 508-511.
26 EEC Directive 97/11, Official Journal of the European Community, L73/5, 1997.
27 Laurens Jan Brinkhorst: “European Environmental Law: an Introduction,” in Koeman, op. cit., supra note 20, 1, at 15.
28 Decree No. 1302, cit., supra note 24, Article 9. 1.
29 Memorial de Dúplica del Reino de España, May 3, 2000, at 36-37.
30 Código Civil, Article 1214, and notes by Francisco Javier Fernandez-Urzainqui, 1999, at 318.
31 Código Civil, Article 1262, and notes by Fernández-Urzainqui, cit., supra note 30, at 327. See in particular Manuel Albaladejo: Derecho Civil, II, Vol. I, Tenth edition, 1997, at 374-375, with reference to a judicial decision of December 14,1964, relating the offer and acceptance to the intention of producing legal effects.
32 Código de Comercio, Article 54.
33 Albaladejo, op. cit., supra note 31, at 385, describing the counter-offer as a second offer that follows the rejection of the first and with reference to a judicial decision of March 14, 1973.
34 See, for example, Calixto Valverde y Valverde: Tratado de Derecho Civil Español, 1926, at 241, with reference to a judicial decision of October 2, 1867. This author comments in particular: “Estimamos también, que de si las circunstancias se dedujere que ha transcurrido con exceso un plazo prudencial para que el aceptante haya podido recoger la oferta, los tribunales podrán considerar en ese caso retirada, o mejor dicho, caducada la oferta,” at 241. See also Federico Puig Peña: Tratado de Derecho Civil Español, Tomo IV, Vol. II, 1951, at 53 and Albaladejo, op. cit., supra note 31, at 390 with reference to the circumstances of the case and the nature of the matter.
35 In accordance with British Bankers Association Financial Data.