Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation


Sarah Zagata Vasani

Saipem SpA v Bangladesh, Decision on jurisdiction and recommendation on provisional measures, ICSID Case No ARB/05/7, IIC 280 (2007), 21st March 2007, United Nations [UN]; World Bank; International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes [ICSID]

From: Investment Claims (http://oxia.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved. date: 19 September 2020

Whether the dispute at issue was a legal dispute under Article 25(1) of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (‘ICSID Convention’).

Whether Saipem made an investment pursuant to Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention.

Whether Saipem made an investment under Article 1(1) of the Bangladesh-Italy BIT.

Whether the facts alleged by Saipem were capable of constituting an expropriation under Article 5 of the BIT.

Whether Bangladesh consented to International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes arbitration for claims based on its domestic courts.

Whether Saipem's treaty claims were contract claims.

Whether the disputed actions of the state enterprise Petrobangla were attributable to Bangladesh.

Whether the requirement to exhaust local remedies applied.

Whether provisional measures pursuant to Article 47 of the ICSID Convention were warranted.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.