Magnifier Search

United Parcel Service of America v. Canada

Type of decisionAward on Jurisdiction
Date of decision22 November 2002
Tribunal
Kenneth Keith (President)
Ronald A. Cass
Yves Fortier
Legal instrumentNorth American Free Trade Agreement
Further information

Statements from this decision

You are currently viewing the statements in their context. To view them in a list, click here.
There is no rule of customary international law prohibiting or regulating anticompetitive behaviour
General remarks regarding the creation of customary international law
The standard of fair and equitable treatment is not additive to or beyond the minimum standard
Article 1116(1) NAFTA requires that the claimant demonstrate a violation of an obligation of Chapter 11, either by the state or by the conduct of state enterprises
Article 1116(1)(b) NAFTA requires that the claimant demonstrate a violation of an obligation of Chapter 11; the article shall not be understood that by the reference to Article 1502(3)(a) NAFTA the article conferred upon the tribunal the jurisdiction to review any part of the NAFTA, as long as an obligation of Chapter 11 was breached at same time
The applicable rules of international law within the meaning of Article 1131(1) NAFTA include the principle of impartial and fair judicial process
General remarks regarding Articles 1502 and 1503 NAFTA
Articles 1502 and 1503 NAFTA impose substantive obligations, but do include investor-state dispute resolution procedures
General remarks regarding Articles 1502 and 1503 NAFTA
Articles 1502 and 1503 NAFTA impose substantive obligations, but do include investor-state dispute resolution procedures
Remarks regarding the delivery of cultural products being covered by Article 2107(a) NAFTA
Remarks regarding the precision required in the statement of claim
To establish jurisdiction, the claimant must demonstrate that the facts – once established – constitute a breach of the invoked obligations

Feedback

Above you will find 11 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!