III. OVERVIEW OF THE DISPUTE
The Claimant argues that the Constitutional Amendment and the denial of the Exploitation Permit (together the "Measures") breached several of the Treaty's substantive standards.165 According to the Claimant, the Measures expropriated and impaired its investment in Slovakia through unreasonable and discriminatory measures, and also constituted unfair and inequitable treatment.
The Respondent disputes the Tribunal's jurisdiction on several grounds, denies any breach of the BIT, and argues that there is no causation between the Measures and the claimed damages. In particular, the Respondent submits that the Constitutional Amendment is a legitimate exercise of police powers, which precludes liability under international law. It also argues that the Claimant was not entitled nor could have it legitimately expected to obtain the Exploitation Permit, because its business plan was illegal.
XI. OPERATIVE PART
On the basis of the foregoing reasons, the Tribunal renders the following decision:
i. The Tribunal has jurisdiction over this dispute;
ii. The claims before it are admissible;
iii. The Slovak Republic has breached Articles 3(2) and 3(1) of the BIT by the manner in which it conducted the administrative proceedings on GFT Slovakia's application for the Exploitation Permit;
iv. Each party shall bear half of the costs of the proceedings.
v. Each Party shall bear the legal fees and other expenses which it incurred in connection with the arbitration.
vi. All other claims are dismissed.
Date: 7 October 2020
Place of arbitration: Geneva, Switzerland
Prof. Robert G. Volterra
Mr. J. Christopher Thomas QC
Prof. Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler