Necessity in International Investment Arbitration - An Unnecessary Split of Opinions in Recent ICSID Cases? Comments on CMS v. Argentina and LG&E v. Argentina

A. Reinisch
Reinisch, August

Article from: TDM 5 (2006), in Case Comments & Awards

Introduction

On 3 October 2006 the ICSID tribunal in the LG&E v. Argentina[1] case rendered its decision on liability. This award broadly addresses the issue of state of necessity both under general international law as well as under the applicable treaty clause of the Argentina-US BIT[2] and concludes that such a situation prevailed in Argentina during a 15-months period between 2001 and 2003 exempting the respondent state of its responsibility for violating various investment standards under the Argentina-US BIT. The LG&E tribunal thereby departs from the result reached in the CMS v. ...

To read this article you need to be a subscriber

Sign in

Forgot password?

Sign in

Subscribe

Fill in the registration form and answer a few simple questions to receive a quote.

Subscribe now

Why subscribe?

TDM journal

Access to TDM Journal articles (well over 2500 articles in total for Premium account holders)

Legal & regulatory

Access to Legal & Regulatory data (well over 10000 documents)

OGEMID

OGEMID membership (lively discussion platform bringing together the world's international dispute management community)

Suggested Citation

A. Reinisch; "Necessity in International Investment Arbitration - An Unnecessary Split of Opinions in Recent ICSID Cases? Comments on CMS v. Argentina and LG&E v. Argentina"
TDM 5 (2006), www.transnational-dispute-management.com

URL: www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=952