Journal of International Arbitration
Volume 29, Issue 4 (2012) pp. 437 – 451

https://doi.org/10.54648/joia2012029

Abstract

Denounciation of the ICSID Convention by a Member State seems to be an effective way of excluding ICSID jurisdiction in Bilateral Trade Agreements (BITs). However, if the ICSID Convention is read together with the bilateral trade agreement that calls for ICSID and using principles of interpretation of international conventions, one arrives at the conclusion that, for investments completed prior to effective date of denunciation in most BITs, the ICSID jurisdiction would survive the denunciation of the ICSID Convention. This has recently been confirmed in the award in the case of Murphy Exploration and Production Company International v. Republic of Ecuador, regarding the modification of the scope of ICSID in a BIT under Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention.

Extract

To read more, you can buy this article.