ICSID CASES in which ROMANIA HAS BEEN INVOLVED

Mihai Berinde (), Dana Petrica () and Liana Mester
Additional contact information
Mihai Berinde: Department of International Business, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania, Doctoral School of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania
Dana Petrica: Doctoral School of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania
Liana Mester: Department of International Business, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania

Annals of Faculty of Economics, 2019, vol. 1, issue 1, 247-252

Abstract: The present paper aims to make a short presentation of the relation between Romania and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes – ICSID, whit special focus on the damages that Romania was ordered to pay to the claimants, by the ICSID Tribunal. ICSID was founded by the World Bank as a special organism to protect the foreign investors and their properties in the host state. After the recognition of ICSID by the states, the foreign investment flow grew and the number of disputes starts growing as well. Romania ratified the ICSID Convention in 1975. If one party is in breach of the Bilateral Investment Treaty or some other legal provision stated in international law, it will have to pay damages to the other party. The first arbitration request filled against Romania at ICSID was registered in November 2001 by Noble Ventures and the last one registered until now is in August 2018 by Alverley Investments Limited and German Properties Ltd. Until now, there were 15 cases registered at ICSID, in which Romania is the respondent. Ten of them were concluded and five are still pending. Until now, the proportion is in Romania favour, only in 30% of the cases Romania was ordered to pay damages, in 70% of the cases the claims were dismissed or the proceedings discontinued. The 3 cases where Romania had to pay damages were about some commitments that Romania undertook when the investments were made and then did not succeed to keep the commitments. In one of the cases, Romania granted some incentives for disfavoured areas and insured the investors that will maintain those incentives for a period of 10 years, but revoked prematurely them. In other case Romania made an agreement for 49-years concession over a land but, again, prematurely revoked the agreement. And, in the last case were Romania was ordered to pay damages, Romania promised to restructure the debts of Socomet, but failed to do so. The present paper is briefly describing those cases in which Romania was the Respondent.

Keywords: ICSID; damages; foreign direct investment; international disputes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: F37 F51 K22 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2019/n1/024.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2019:i:1:p:247-252

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Annals of Faculty of Economics from University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catalin ZMOLE ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).