Arbitral Digest

Matter

Electrabel S.A. v. Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/19)

Case no.
ARB/07/19
Applicable rules
ICSID Arbitration Rules (10 April 2006)
  1. 25 February 2008Arbitration

    25 February 2008Arbitration

    Decision on the Claimant's Proposal to Disqualify a Member of the Tribunal dated 25 February 2008

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal rejected the Claimant's proposal to disqualify Professor Brigitte Stern as not well-founded under the ICSID Convention and Arbitration Rules. The parties' legal costs were to lie where they fell, subject to any later application.

    Supporting details

    3 authorities · 5 participants
    Electrabel S.A.
    Republic of Hungary
    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
    Arbitrator
    V.V. Veeder
    Arbitrator
    Brigitte Stern

    Authorities cited

    3
    • ICSID Convention
      statute
    • ICSID Arbitration Rules in force on 10 April 2006
      statute
    • Compania de Aguas del Aconquija S.A. and Vivendi Universal v Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3)
      case-law

    8 months and 25 days later · 268 days

  2. 19 November 2008Arbitration

    19 November 2008Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 1 dated 19 November 2008

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal ordered the Claimant to file its additional claim and supporting documentation by 30 January 2009, directed the parties to agree a revised timetable, suspended one group of Respondent objections, joined another group to the merits, and decided in principle to allow the European Commission to file a non-disputing-party submission subject to further arrangements.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    3 months and 19 days later · 111 days

  3. 10 March 2009Arbitration

    10 March 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 2 dated 10 March 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal requested the parties to revise their procedural timetable consistently with the February 2010 hearing dates and maintained its intention that the European Commission intervene after the Respondent's Counter-Memorial with knowledge of the parties' written submissions.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    17 days later · 17 days

  4. 27 March 2009Arbitration

    27 March 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 3 dated 27 March 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal approved and ordered a revised procedural timetable through the February 2010 hearing, including deadlines for the Respondent's Counter-Memorial, document requests, the European Commission's amicus submission, and the parties' subsequent submissions.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    1 month and 1 day later · 32 days

  5. 28 April 2009Arbitration

    28 April 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 4 dated 28 April 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal allowed the European Commission to file a written submission as a non-disputing party by 12 June 2009, defined its subject matter, and directed the parties to cooperate on access to their submissions subject to confidentiality arrangements.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    3 months and 21 days later · 112 days

  6. 18 August 2009Arbitration

    18 August 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 5 dated 18 August 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal declined most of the parties' disputed document-production requests, ordered production for the Claimant's Items 118 and 119, and required production no later than 31 August 2009.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    2 months and 24 days later · 85 days

  7. 11 November 2009Arbitration

    11 November 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 6 dated 11 November 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal declined the Claimant's application for a further order compelling production, while drawing attention to possible inspection of redacted documents, adverse inferences for wilful non-compliance, and costs consequences for a hearing adjournment caused by non-production.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    29 days later · 29 days

  8. 10 December 2009Arbitration

    10 December 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 7 dated 10 December 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal directed arrangements for the February 2010 hearing, including speaking time, witnesses, hearing preparation, and post-hearing submissions, and decided that the hearing would take place at the World Bank in Washington, D.C.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    6 days later · 6 days

  9. 16 December 2009Arbitration

    16 December 2009Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 8 dated 16 December 2009

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal approved the parties' joint proposal to amend the procedural timetable and granted the Respondent's application for production of the draft new PPA initialled by Dunamenti and MVM, finding the request specific, limited, and sufficiently relevant.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    5 months and 15 days later · 166 days

  10. 31 May 2010Arbitration

    31 May 2010Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 9 dated 31 May 2010

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal allowed the European Commission decision and the 2009 Report on Polish Stranded Costs to enter the evidential file, gave the Respondent and then the Claimant a limited opportunity to respond, imposed page limits, barred new exhibits, and allowed both parties to update their costs figures.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    4 months later · 123 days

  11. 1 October 2010Arbitration

    1 October 2010Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 10 dated 1 October 2010

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal requested information on the Luxembourg proceedings, implementation of the Hungarian stranded-costs decree, and whether the parties wished to make submissions on the AES Summit Generation award, with responses due by 29 October 2010.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    8 months and 23 days later · 266 days

  12. 24 June 2011Arbitration

    24 June 2011Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 11 dated 24 June 2011

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal extended to 1 August 2011 the deadline for both parties to respond substantively to the tribunal's Queries.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    1 year, 5 months and 6 days later · 525 days

  13. 30 November 2012Arbitration

    30 November 2012Arbitration

    Decision on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law and Liability dated 30 November 2012

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal declared that ICSID had jurisdiction. It dismissed the PPA Pricing Claim, Regulated Pricing Claim, and G1 Unit Claim as to liability, and dismissed all other grounds of the PPA Termination Claim except the fair and equitable treatment issue concerning Net Stranded Costs, for which it reserved its decision to a later phase. It made no order on costs and did not finally decide quantum or interest.

    Supporting details

    7 authorities · 5 participants
    Electrabel S.A.
    Republic of Hungary
    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
    Arbitrator
    Brigitte Stern
    Arbitrator
    V.V. Veeder

    Authorities cited

    7
    • Energy Charter Treaty, signed December 1994
      statute
    • ICSID Convention
      statute
    • ICSID Arbitration Rules in force on 10 April 2006
      statute
    • Treaty on European Union
      statute
    • Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
      statute
    • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1155 UNTS 331
      statute
    • IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration (1999)
      statute

    4 months and 24 days later · 144 days

  14. 23 April 2013Arbitration

    23 April 2013Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 12 dated 23 April 2013

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal recorded the agreed timetable for submissions on the allocation and amount of costs and on the effect and damages standard for non-payment of Net Stranded Costs, and recorded the agreement for an oral hearing on 15 and 16 May 2014.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    6 months and 15 days later · 198 days

  15. 7 November 2013Arbitration

    7 November 2013Arbitration

    Procedural Order No. 13 dated 7 November 2013

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal approved the revised timetable agreed by the parties, including deadlines for the Respondent's Counter-Submission, the Claimant's Reply Submission, and the Respondent's Rejoinder, while leaving the scheduled hearing dates unchanged.

    Supporting details

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    2 years and 18 days later · 748 days

  16. 25 November 2015Arbitration

    25 November 2015Arbitration

    Award dated 25 November 2015

    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

    Decision summary
    The tribunal confirmed its earlier Decision, dismissed all of the Claimant's substantive claims and claims for interest and costs, ordered each party to bear its own legal costs and expenses, and ordered Electrabel to bear all other arbitration costs, including ICSID administrative costs and tribunal fees and expenses.

    Supporting details

    4 authorities · 5 participants
    Electrabel S.A.
    Republic of Hungary
    International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
    Arbitrator
    Brigitte Stern
    Arbitrator
    V.V. Veeder

    Authorities cited

    4
    • Energy Charter Treaty, signed December 1994
      statute
    • ICSID Convention
      statute
    • ICSID Arbitration Rules in force on 10 April 2006
      statute
    • Budapesti Eromu Zrt v European Commission (Joined Cases T-80/06 and T-182/09)
      case-law

Matter record

Report a correction

Electrabel S.A. v. Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/19) · Matter