RE: Good morning30 Jul 2019 12:45
Paul,
The following is how I understand it. It should not be considered fact. My contact on all things legal is out of the country at the moment and so I can't check my reasoning.
However,
On March 28th 2018, Italy " submitted an Objection to Jurisdiction under 3 Article 41(1) of the Arbitration Rules and a Request for Bifurcation of the proceedings together with Legal Authorities RL-001 to RL-011 (the “Resp. Intra-EU Jurisdictional Objection” and “Request for Bifurcation”). The Respondent’s objection was that the ECT and the ICSID Convention could not provide jurisdiction between nationals of one European Union (“EU”) Member State and another EU Member State. "
Bifurcation is when the tribunal agrees to separate jurisdictional issues from the merits.
On April 19th the tribunal decided not to suspend proceedings but to prioritise the question on jurisdiction based on Italy's belief that EU states can not sue each other ( vattenfall, achmea etc).
On 4 February 2019, the Tribunal suggested, in the interest of procedural efficiency, to issue a ruling on the Intra-EU Jurisdictional Objection prior to any other ruling and both parties agreed. A hearing was held and post hearing submissions were made. Once both parties have sent their post hearing brief, the 120 day clock begins. Hence why we heard the decision at the end of June.
We now have to wait for the tribunal to schedule a hearing for the merits and quantum of the case. Once this takes place and the the post hearing briefs are submitted, the 120 day clock will start again.
As soon as I find out when the hearing is scheduled, I'll let everyone know
I hope that helps
Mogger
https://www.arbitratoinitalia.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/rockhopper-v-italy.pdf
Sign In
Follow the stocks
