Summary

Reproduced from www.worldbank.org/icsid with permission of ICSID. (Document, does not apply to summary and/or TDM IACL Case Report below).

---

Case report (free download)

Case Report by Magdalena Bulit Goñi, editor Victoria Ritah Nalule

Summary

In the Decision on the Respondent’s Preliminary Objection under ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5) rendered on March 8, 2016, the Ad Hoc Committee found that the Arbitration Rule 41(5) was applicable to the annulment proceedings mutatis mutandis through Arbitration Rule 53.

The Committee rejected Venezuela’s preliminary objection on consideration that, failure to comply with the detail requirement of Rule 50(1)(c) could not be the basis of a preliminary objection as this did not allow the determination of the claim's manifest lack of legal merits and that the cost of rejecting it would be less significant for Venezuela than the impact on Venoklim's rights under the ICSID Convention.

Main Issues

Annulment Proceedings - Preliminary Objections- Arbitration Rule 41(5) - Arbitration Rule 50 (1)(c) - Lack of Legal Merits - Requirement of Detail.

Venoklim Holding B.V. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/22) – Decision on the Respondent’s Preliminary Objection under ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5). (March, 8 2016) (English)

Case report provided by International Arbitration Case Law (IACL)

More Case Reports?

You can find all TDM IACL Case Reports here.