Member Info for CitizenTS

The point of ICSID is precisely to provide recourse from domestic (in this case EU) courts, especially if they look like they are being influenced by government.
What exactly are ICSID being paid to do?

The point of ICSID is precisely to provide recourse from domestic (in this case EU) courts, especially if they look like they are being influenced by government.
What exactly are they being paid to do?

Within most EU countries there is a different tradition where the legal system has been far more a creature of government. There are far more "codes", the legal system largely just applies rules set by government. Justice is sought by appeals to government, demonstrations, farmers blocking roads and so on and not traditionally through the courts
The US is, at least traditionally, at the other extreme. The courts are often not even called a legal system, they're called a ... justice system.
Goverent and the courts only really meet on the appointment of Supreme Court judges. Everyone has access if you can convince a lawyer of your case etc. The UK is somewhere in the middle, perhaps two-thirds towards the US.
That's why the UK is often the chosen venue for sophisticated international dispute resolution. It's just far more developed.
It will absolutely be a presumption of the Italians that this is all really a government decision, ugly and even corrupt as that may sound. It's just the way continental European states, and I'd say the EU, have traditionally worked.
If ICSID want a shred of credibility they should not entertain the even slightest intimation of EU lobbying. It would be the end of ICSID.

Within the Eu

oops, they seem to have reappeared on my screen now

Where did buzzthomas's and the other post on UK gas prices disappear to?
Transparently decision time for Harbour on SL as cash rolls in from high gas prices etc

Glenrothes, re your "I interpret the 38 million+ shares as 55% of the actual vote in a Meeting because no more than 70 million shares normally vote."
With your extra shares wouldn't you expect the 70m to become circa 100m, plus or minus any change in the rest?

On the ECJ case and Allen and Overy report -
The ECJ is just the sort of arm of government from which ICSID is there to provide recourse.
There could hardly be a better reason for ICSID than a domestic court precluding a party wronged by a constituent state from pursuing their case!

Paperwork's, excellent work finding these hopeless articles! Who on earth has got to Emily Thornberry! Of course Labour would love to be able to do anything it wanted with no constraints of the legal or any other sort. Just like Xi JinPing. It's in precisely that mode that they don't look like trustworthy stewards of a democracy and are unelectable. It's the Thornberry's if this works that are their problem.

XR folk should should be assisted by disconnecting all electricity and gas from their homes.

godawful - on this I agree, you are ideed sick

well yes, old godawful is probably the boss from hell

Godders, your expectations are between you, your maker, and maybe your conscience.

That surely is relevant for us

in that scenario Godders would be quite mistaken to expect the company to comment - but of course he's not a silly small-timer himself because he says he owns a shed of these ... err?

Cubane: It would be far more in character for the Italians to test out whether Rkh and their lawyers are silly small-timers or not by making an equally silly low-ball offer disconnected from the economics of the case (combined with some random noise about the process that we have seen). That could have delayed things. It may be we've yet to see what they then do when it turns out the only silliness around is theirs and the arbitrators run out of patience ...

... that was for videodawn

It's using the oil for burning that harms the environment, not the producers. If anyone is in the wrong on oil and the environment it's principally you as a user and, well, maybe me too.

Hard to make sense of ICSID delay but here's speciation which would at least be reasonable ...
Work has indeed been completed. It was a 4:1 decision (I may have got the number of judges wrong there) in Rkh's favour for an award at the high end of the range. The chair then decided to to have a final try for a unanimous decision to have more force and to help counter any PR type criticism. This did not fall at the first hurdle but on the has actually progressed to involve some rewriting of the decision to satisfy all.
At least that sort of thing does happen.
If it's not unanimous then I was wrong, only a speculation.
If it is unanimous I will take a bow and acknowledge the applause ??

Markets know what they know. Share prices still move, all the time.