Jurisdiction challenge to an investment treaty award (Agarwal and Mehta v Oriental Republic of Uruguay)

Article summary

Arbitration analysis: The Paris Court of Appeal has recently delivered a significant ruling in the proceedings for the setting aside of an award in Rikita Mehta, Prenay Agarwal and Vinita Agarwal v Uruguay, issued on 6 August 2020. It held that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law tribunal incorrectly declined jurisdiction, when it found that it lacked jurisdiction ratione temporis on the basis that the alleged breaches of the BIT predated the effective making of the investment. The Paris Court of Appeal dismissed this reasoning and sided with claimants indicating that under the treaty, the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal was not subject to a condition of temporality of when the investments were ‘made’. The Paris Court of Appeal finally dismissed Uruguay’s alternative jurisdictional objections, and thus set aside the underlying award. Written by Julien Fouret (partner) and Sandra Geahchan (associate) at Eversheds Sutherland, Paris.