Published 15 March 2019
Is now available as part of the joint OGEL/TDM/ArbitralWomen Special Issue on "Strategic Considerations in Energy Disputes":
[Added 15/03/2019] - Aim of this paper is to proffer a brief and comprehensive overview of the energy investment jurisprudence that has developed on the basis of the ECT. Cases that have been settled and/ or discontinued, as well as those concluded, albeit not offering the award in public, shall not be discussed. Similarly, though due to linguistic obstacles, the Spanish award in Isolux Infrastructure v. Spain (SCC Case No. V2013/153) is not included.
The paper is structured in the following manner: at the outset, it elaborates on the purpose of the ECT, including a brief historical remark. In the following part, which constitutes the bulk of this paper, it displays decisions and final awards, shortly explaining the alleged breach(es), any third parties or parallel proceedings, the factual background and the conclusions of the tribunals. Thereafter, it summarizes the objects that were aspired and the ones that have been achieved under the ECT, in the sense of assessing a compilation of the already displayed jurisprudence against the ECT’s object. Subsequently, it offers some concluding remarks. The paper ends with two tables: the first sets out cases, both pending and concluded, where decisions and final awards have been issued; and the second sets out pending cases, where neither decisions nor awards have been issued. The first was made with the intent to offer a succinct demonstration of the jurisprudence to practitioners, whereas the latter aims at showing the steep rising in requesting arbitration protection on limited and often reiterated matters of law and questions of fact.
The paper is now available here "Range of Disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty".