Summary

Reproduced from www.worldbank.org/icsid with permission of ICSID.

I. INTRODUCTION AND PARTIES

1. This case concerns the outcome of a dispute submitted to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ("ICSID" or the "Centre") on the basis of a contractual agreement and the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, dated October 14, 1966 (the "ICSID Convention").

2. The Claimant in the arbitration proceedings was Carnegie Minerals (Gambia) Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of the Republic of The Gambia ("Carnegie" or the "Claimant").

3. The Respondent in the arbitration proceedings and the Applicant in the annulment proceedings is the Republic of The Gambia ("The Gambia," the "Respondent," or the "Applicant").

4. The Claimant and the Respondent are collectively referred to as the "Parties." The Parties' representatives and their addresses are listed above on page (i).

5. The original arbitral proceeding (the "Arbitration") dealt with a dispute between the Parties arising from the termination by The Gambia of a Mining Licence granted to Carnegie (the "Mining Licence").[1] In short, Carnegie alleged that The Gambia wrongfully terminated the Mining Licence after Carnegie had allegedly already substantially invested in the mining project for which the Licence was concluded, and after the mining operations for this project were, according to Carnegie, underway and productive.[2]

6. On September 29, 2014, the Tribunal issued a Decision on Jurisdiction, Admissibility, Claim, Counterclaim, and Certain Damage Issues, in which it found, among other things, that it had jurisdiction over the dispute, that Carnegie's claims were admissible, that the termination of the Mining Licence was unlawful, and that Gambia was liable for breach of the Mining License (the "Decision on Jurisdiction and Merits").[3] On July 14, 2015, the Tribunal issued its award (the "Award"), thereby confirming the findings made in the Decision on Jurisdiction and Merits and ordering The Gambia to pay Carnegie approximately USD 22 million, corresponding to damages, interest on damages, and arbitration costs.4

7. In this annulment proceeding, The Gambia invokes one ground for annulment to the effect that the Tribunal was not properly constituted (ICSID Convention Article 52(1)(a)). The Committee notes that in its Application for Annulment, The Gambia referred to two other grounds for annulment, namely (i) the Tribunal manifestly exceeded its powers (ICSID Convention Article 52(1)(b)); and (ii) there has been a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure (ICSID Convention Article 52(1)(d)). However, these grounds for annulment were no longer mentioned in The Gambia's Memorial on Annulment and were not mentioned at the Hearing. Consequently, they are not addressed in this Decision.

....

VII. DECISION

189. For the reasons set forth above, the ad hoc Committee decides as follows:

(1) The Application for Annulment of the Republic of The Gambia is rejected in its entirety;

(2) The Parties equally bear 50% of the costs covering the ad hoc Committee Member's fees and expenses, the ICSID administrative fees and other direct expenses, as set out in paragraph 181 above, and the Claimant shall therefore reimburse The Gambia the sum of USD 221,992.19;

144 Ms. Kalicki's Decision of July 6, 2010 on Request for Resignation (R-32), ¶ 46.

145 Ms. Kalicki's Decision of July 6, 2010 on Request for Resignation (R-32), ¶ 47.

146 See above, ¶¶ 175-176.

...

footnotes

[1] The Mining Licence has been exhibited in the annulment proceedings as Exhibit R-26, Mining Licence of December 29, 2005 between the Government of the Gambia and Carnegie minerals (Gambia) Limited (hereafter "Mining Licence (R-26)").

[2] Decision on Jurisdiction and Merits (C-11), ¶¶ 79-147.

[3] Award (C-12), ¶¶ 2-4.