Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Republic of Peru - ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21 - Award including Partial Dissenting Opinion Professor Philippe Sands QC - English - 30 November 2017
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 Bobin Park, Editor Diego Luis Alonso Massa
Claimant brought an action for relief against Peru pursuant to the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Peru ("FTA") alleging Peru breached, inter alia, expropriation protections, fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, and protection against unreasonable or discriminatory measures under the FTA, in relation to its investment in a silver mining project in the Santa Ana area of Puno, which is within 50 kilometres of the border between Peru and Bolivia. As its preliminary conclusion, the Tribunal found that within the meaning of the FTA (i) Claimant made an investment; (ii) the Tribunal has jurisdiction over the claim; and (iii) there is no bar to the exercise by the Tribunal of such jurisdiction. Further, the Tribunal decided on the Merits that the Peruvian government's adoption of Supreme Decree 032-2011 constituted indirect expropriation of the right of Claimant to operate the Santa Ana concessions, and that this occurred in violation of Article 812 of the FTA.
Jurisdiction; Admissibility; Indirect Expropriation; Lawfulness of Supreme Decree 032-2011; Police Powers Doctrine; Fair and Equitable Treatment
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Republic of Peru - ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21 - Award including Partial Dissenting Opinion Professor Philippe Sands QC - 30 November 2017
Case report provided by International Arbitration Case Law (IACL)
More Case Reports?
You can find all TDM IACL Case Reports here.