United States:
The ‘Close Connection' Test And State Counterclaims In Investment Arbitration – When Is ‘Close' Close Enough?
12 January 2018
WilmerHale
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Investment arbitrations typically entail an investor alleging
breaches by the respondent State of protections conferred on the
investor by the State in an investment treaty. However, it is rare
for States to assert counterclaims, and even more rare for
tribunals to determine those counterclaims on the merits. While
there may be practical reasons why States prefer not to raise
counterclaims before investor-State tribunals (including a
preference to litigate those issues in their national courts),
counterclaims are also limited by jurisdictional and admissibility
hurdles that do not apply to the investor's claims. One such
admissibility impediment is the requirement that the counterclaim
be "closely connected" to the investor's claim.
Click here to continue reading.
Originally published by VentureBeat.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from United States
Defenses To Contract Damages In New York
KI Legal
Defendants who face breach of contract damages claims can assert several defenses to mitigate, or altogether eliminate, a potential award of damages against them.
Is Premises Liability The Same As Negligence?
Ward and Smith, P.A.
In today's world, we travel all the time. We shop at grocery stores and department stores, we take walks on the sidewalks in our neighborhoods, and we go to large events, such as concerts or weddings, at various venues.
Defamation vs. Free Speech
Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs
The concepts of defamation and free speech often collide, raising questions about where the line should be drawn between the right to express oneself and the responsibility...