Ecuador v Occidental Exploration & Production Co

Mr M Cran QC, Mr D Bethlehem QC and Mr S Birt (instructed by Weil Gotshal & Manges, LLP, London) for the Claimant Mr C Greenwood QC and Mr T Landau (instructed by Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP, London) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th December 2005 Further written submissions sent by Claimant on 19th December 2005. ____________________

(1) The Preamble sets out the aim of the Treaty, which is to promote greater economic cooperation and investment between the Contracting Parties (ie. the two signatory States), but on a defined and agreed basis.

(2) Article I sets out various definitions. "Investment" is defined broadly and this definition is relevant in the current dispute. [11]

(3) Article II sets out the basis on which each Contracting Party will permit and treat investment. The general principle is that investments of nationals and companies of either Party will receive either " national treatment or most favoured nation treatment " whichever is the better. Article II also provides that the Parties will ensure that investment will have fair and equitable treatment according to international law standards. This Article was central to the arbitration and relevant to the current challenge.

(4) Article III deals with expropriation or nationalisation of investments. Expropriation or nationalisation of investments is not to take place either directly or indirectly except for a public purpose and on defined conditions. Article III is relevant to OEPC's contingent cross � challenge to the arbitration tribunal's apparent conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction to deal with OEPC's allegations of expropriation.