Magnifier Search

S.D. Myers v. Canada

Type of decisionFinal Award concerning the apportionment of costs between the Disputing Parties
Date of decision30 December 2002
Tribunal
J. Martin Hunter (President)
Bryan P. Schwartz
Edward C. Chiasson
Legal instrumentNorth American Free Trade Agreement
Related decision(s)
Further information

Statements from this decision

You are currently viewing the statements in their context. To view them in a list, click here.
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 1976
Article 40
General statements regarding Article 40(1) UNCITRAL
In assessing the apportionment of costs according to Article 40(1) UNCITRAL, a tribunal may consider the parties’ conduct during the proceedings
Article 40(2) UNCITRAL stresses a tribunal’s discretion regarding the allocation of the costs of legal representation, where success of the party is just one determining factor
To determine the reasonableness of costs under Article 40(2) UNCITRAL, a tribunal does not need to second-guess decisions made between client and attorney

Feedback

Above you will find 4 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!