Magnifier Search

Global Trading Resource/Globex v. Ukraine

Type of decisionAward
Date of decision1 December 2010
Franklin Berman (President)
Christopher Thomas
Emmanuel Gaillard
Legal instrumentBIT between Ukraine and USA (1996)
Further information

Statements from this decision

You are currently viewing the statements in their context. To view them in a list, click here.
If the treaty requires them to be associated with an investment, claims to money do not constitute an investment in themselves
The definition of investment within Article 25 ICSID Convention is generally left to the consent of the parties; there is, however, an objective limit to this freedom
Whether there is an investment is subject to a two-part test in treaty-based ICSID proceedings
The obligations to perform additional activities, such as engineering, design and production, do not turn a commercial contract into an investment
"Manifestly" within the meaning of Rule 41(5) ICSID Arbitration Rules sets a high standard; the objection has to be established clearly and obviously, with relative ease and despatch
Rule 41(5) ICSID Arbitration Rules is not limited to claims manifestly without substantive legal merit; it also applies to claims for which the tribunal manifestly lacks jurisdiction
Remarks regarding the procedure under Rules 41(5) ICSID Arbitration Rules


Above you will find 7 statement(s) from this decision. Please note that when viewing the statements in their context, the same statement may appear multiple times if it is relevant for more than one topic. Did we miss something? Feel free to send us your suggestions!