Energy Dispute Resolution: Investment Protection, Transit and the Energy Charter Treaty - Hardcover
Energy Dispute Resolution: Investment Protection, Transit and the Energy Charter Treaty - Electronic
IOANNIS KARDASSOPOULOS v GEORGIA
ICSID CASE NO. ARB/05/18
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP
The Kardassopoulos case will be remembered, foremost, as the
first decision to hold a respondent state to account despite claims
that its domestic law prohibited the provisional application of the
1994 Energy Charter Treaty (the “ECT” or “Treaty”).1 In a
unanimous decision of 6 July 2007, an ICSID Tribunal upheld its
jurisdiction to decide whether or not Georgia had expropriated
the Greek claimant's interest in an exclusive concession to
transport oil and gas via pipelines across the former Soviet
republic of Georgia. The unique feature of this case was its timing;
it involved an expropriation implemented through executive
decrees passed in 1996, i.e. following signature of the ECT by
Georgia and Greece but prior to the entry into force of the Treaty.
The facts thus offered the perfect opportunity to test the meaning
and effect of the Contracting Parties' agreement to apply the
Treaty provisionally pending its entry into force in April 1998.
But the Kardassopoulos case is as much about geography as it is
about timing. Nestled between the Caspian Sea and Black Sea,
Georgia lies along one of the world’s most ancient trading routes:
the myriad of trade arteries which linked China across Central
Asia, India and Persia to the Mediterranean: a lifeline of trade,
commerce and information subsequently coined the “Silk Road”.
David Herlihy is Counsel in Skadden’s International
Arbitration Group. He has acted in a wide range of significant
international arbitrations, including disputes conducted under the
Arbitration Rules of the ICC, LCIA, ICSID, ICDR and UNCITRAL.
LL.M., New York University School of Law (John F. Kennedy
Memorial Scholar) B.C.L., The National University of Ireland,
(First Class Honours, College Scholar).