Arbitral awards of the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration / compiled, translated and annotated by Mohie Eldin I. Alam Eldin ; preface by M.I.M. Aboul-Enein ; English editing and legal commentary by Nudrat B. Majeed.
2000
JX6279 AL11 2000 (Map It)
Available at Offsite ReCAP Facility
Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Title
Arbitral awards of the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration / compiled, translated and annotated by Mohie Eldin I. Alam Eldin ; preface by M.I.M. Aboul-Enein ; English editing and legal commentary by Nudrat B. Majeed.
Uniform Title
Minaṣṣat al-taḥkīm al-tijārī al-dawlī. English
Published
The Hague ; Boston : Kluwer Law International, [2000]
Copyright
©2000
Call Number
JX6279 AL11 2000
ISBN
9041112219 (hb : alk. paper)
Description
xx, 258 pages ; 25 cm
System Control No.
(OCoLC)42476006
Note
Includes index.
Record Appears in
Added Author
Added Corporate Author
Table of Contents
Introduction
xiii
Case 1
Malicorp Ltd. (UK) v. The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt and others
1
Summary
1
Held in the Award of March 7, 2006
2
Facts [in Brief]
4
Representations and Warranties by the Concessor
8
Reasons
12
Jurisdiction/Consent to Arbitrate
13
The International Character of the Concession Contract
16
Jurisdiction
17
The Administrative Judiciary Court Decision
18
Article 58 of Council of State Law No. 47 of 1972
18
The Significance of the UK-Egypt BIT
19
Breach/Annulment of the Concession Contract
20
Article 46 Arbitration Law No. 27 of 1994. Suspension for Criminal Proceedings
23
Damages
25
Award
27
A.
Issues Subsequent to the Award of March 7, 2006
30
B.
Challenges
32
C.
Judgment of February 19, 2006
33
Case No. 18628 of the Year 59 before the Judicial Administrative Court
33
Text of the Judgment of February 19, 2006
33
D.
Further Pending Cases
35
Procedure
36
E.
Further Proceedings before the CCA
40
F.
Commentary on the Constitutional Court Judgment of January 15, 2012
46
G.
The ICSID Phase
46
Case 2
EU Joint Venture of Three Companies (Contractor) v. An African Tourism Company (Owner)
73
Summary
73
Held
74
Facts and Applicable Rules
79
1.
The Claimants' Request for Arbitration
87
2.
The Procedure
88
3.
The Parties' Submissions
89
4.
The Claimants' Statement of Case (Termination)
89
5.
The Claimants' Statement of Case (Pre-Termination)
93
6.
The Claimants' Statement of Case (Post-Termination)
94
7.
The Respondents' Statement of Defense (Pre-Termination)
100
8.
The Respondents' Statement of Defense (Termination)
103
9.
The Respondents' Statement of Defense (Post-Termination)
104
10.
The Respondents' Counterclaim
106
11.
The Claimants' Reply to the Respondents' Defense
109
12.
The Claimants' Defense to the Respondents' Counterclaim
112
13.
The Hearing
114
14.
The Claimants' Witnesses
118
15.
The Respondent's Witness
133
16.
Formal Closure of the Hearing
138
17.
The Parties' Post-Hearings
138
17.1.
The Validity of the Respondents' Termination of the Contract
138
The Claimants' Position
138
The Respondents' Position
139
17.2.
The Tribunal's Jurisdiction to Deal with Matters in the Post-Termination Period
140
The Respondents' Position
140
The Claimants' Position
140
17.3.
The Claimants' Justifications of the Delay in Performance of the Works
140
The Respondents' Position
144
17.4.
The Quantum of the Claimants' Claim
146
The Claimants' Position
146
The Respondents' Position
147
17.5.
The Respondents' Counterclaim
148
The Respondents' Position
148
The Claimants' Position
148
18.
The Tribunal's Analysis and Conclusions
148
18.1.
Issue A: Was the Termination of Contract Justified?
149
Procedure
149
Grounds
150
18.2.
Issue B: Are the Claimants Entitled to Relief During the Pre-Termination Period, and if so, to What Extent?
160
18.3.
Issue C: Does the Tribunal have Jurisdiction in Respect of the Post-Termination Period?
165
18.4.
Issue D: Are the Claimants Entitled to Relief During the Post-Termination Period and if so to What Extent?
169
18.5.
Issue E: Are the Claimants Entitled to Relief as a Result of Loss of Opportunity?
171
18.6.
Issue F: Are the Claimants Entitled to Relief as a Result of Loss of Profit?
172
18.7.
Issue G: Are the Claimants Entitled to any Payments of Interest?
172
18.8.
Issue H: Are the Respondents' Counterclaims Justified and if so, to What Extent?
173
19.
Quantum
174
19.1.
The Claimants' Claim
174
19.1.A.
Reimbursement of Actual Costs Incurred in Performance of the Project
174
19.2.
The Respondents' Counterclaim
180
Summary
180
20.
Conclusion
181
21.
Interest
181
21.
Costs
181
22.
The Tribunal's Decisions in this Award
182
Case 3
J.V. of American and EU Dredging Companies v. Red Sea Public Authority (RSPA)
185
Summary
185
Held
186
Facts
196
1.1.
Parties and the Project
196
1.2.
Negotiations for the Contract/The Invitation to Tender
196
The Tender
197
The Clarifications Meetings
199
The Signature of the Contract
199
1.3.
The Contract
199
1.4.
Settlement of Disputes/ Arbitration Clause 20.3
200
The Purpose of the Contract
201
The Contract Price
201
The Guarantees
201
The Duration of the Contract
202
The Contract's Performance/Notice to Commence
202
The Design Works
202
The Dredging Works
203
The Presence on Site of the Quay Wall Contractor
204
The Equipment
205
1.5.
The Completion of the Works
205
The Taking-over Certificate
205
The Statement at Completion
206
The Engineer's decision
206
The Report on Works
207
1.6.
The Dispute
207
1.7.
The Subsequent Facts
209
2.
Procedure
209
2.1.
Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal
209
2.2.
Hearing Dated July 21 and 22, 2003
210
3.
General Comments
210
3.1.
The Claimants' Contentions
210
3.2.
The Respondent's Contentions
212
3.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
214
4.
The Claimants' Claims
218
4.1.
Claim 1: The Claimants' Claim Relating to the Non-Payment by the Employer of Certified Sums
218
4.1.1.
The Claimants' Contentions
218
4.1.2.
The Respondent's Contentions
220
4.1.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
221
4.2.
Claim 2: The Claimants' Claim Relating to the late Payments of Certified Sums
223
4.2.1.
The Claimants' Contentions
223
4.2.2.
The Respondent's Contentions
224
4.2.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
225
4.3.
Claim 3: The Claimants' Claims for Payment of Additional Works Performed and other Financial Items
228
4.3.1.
Navigation Simulation: Additional Ship Navigation Simulation
229
4.3.2.
Increase to the Depth of Tug Basin
231
4.3.3.
Slope Protection between Ro-Ro Berths
233
4.3.4.
Increase in Width of the Basin
235
4.3.5.
Removal of Outcrops from Diaphragm Wall
236
4.3.6.
Relocation of Navigation Leading Lights
237
4.3.7.
Reimbursement of Additional Import Duties
238
4.3.8.
Extended Bank Guarantees
239
4.4.
Claim 4: The Claimant's Claim for Payment of Works Performed under Changed Circumstances
241
4.4.1.
Ordnance Delays
242
4.4.2.
Claim 3.2: Quay Wall Contractor Delays
253
4.4.3.
Claim 5: Soil Conditions
265
4.5.
Claim 5: The Late Release of the Contractor's Performance Letter of Guarantee
267
4.5.1.
The Claimants' Contentions
267
4.5.2.
The Respondent's Contentions
268
4.5.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
269
5.
Counterclaims
270
5.1.
Counterclaim 1: The Respondent's Counterclaims Relating to the Contractor's Breaches of the Disposal Area
270
5.1.1.
Parties' General Comments
270
5.1.2.
The Costs of the Relocation of the Port South Fence
271
5.1.3.
The Contractor's Failure to Protect the Bunds by Rock
276
5.1.4.
The Contractor's Failure to Separate the Dredged Materials
279
5.1.5.
The Increase of the Onshore Dumped Material
281
5.2.
Counterclaim 2: The Respondent's Counterclaim for the Reimbursement of the Works to Repair the Quay Wall
284
5.2.1.
The Respondent's Contentions
284
5.2.2.
The Claimants' Contentions
285
5.2.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
285
5.3.
Counterclaim 3: The Respondent's Counterclaim Relating to the Damages to the Environment
286
5.3.1.
The Respondent's Contentions
286
5.3.2.
The Claimants' Contentions
289
5.3.3.
The Arbitral Tribunal's Discussion
292
6.
Interest
296
7.
Costs
297
8.
Award
297
Case 4
European Consortium of 4 Companies v. Ministry of Public Works and Water Resources of an African State (Partial)
299
Summary
299
Held
300
Facts
301
1.
The Dispute between the Parties
301
2.
Position of the Defendant
302
3.
The Position of the Claimant
302
4.
Position of the Tribunal in General
304
5.
The Position: The Conclusions Based upon the Egyptian "Internal" Law
304
6.
The Acceptance of International Arbitration by the Effect of the International Instruments to which the Arab Republic of Egypt is a Party
310
7.
The Jurisdiction over the Claimant's Claims Regarding Stamp Duties
313
8.
Conclusions of the Tribunal
313
Case 5
European Consortium of 4 Companies v. Ministry of Public Works and Water Resources of an African State (Interim)
315
Held
315
The Tribunal's Analysis: Relationship between Article 25 and Clause 67
315
Facts
321
I.
The Contract and the Reference to Arbitration
321
II.
The Applicable Rules
325
III.
The Arbitration Agreement and Applicable Laws
326
IV.
The Present Issues: Outline
326
V.
Summary of the Arbitration Proceedings
327
VI.
Suspension or Termination of the Arbitral Proceedings
332
Issues [and Details]
332
Order dated July 1, 1995
333
Order dated July 31, 1994
333
Conclusions on Section VI
335
VII.
The Relationship between Article 2S and Clause 67
335
Background facts
335
Further Matters Raised by the Pleadings
337
The Defendant's Requests
337
The Issues Raised by Article 25 and Clause 67
338
Time Limit
338
Reference to Arbitration
338
The Role of the Engineer's Representative
338
Article 388, Egyptian Civil Code
339
The Tribunal's Analysis
339
Conclusions
346
VIII.
Clauses 44 and 52(5) of the General Conditions
346
Relevant Provisions
346
The Defendant's Requests
348
The Parties' Submissions
348
Construction of the Clauses: the Tribunal's Analysis
349
Factual Analysis
352
Conclusions
356
IX.
Operative Part
356
Dissenting Opinion by the Defendant's Arbitrator
356
Case 6
European Consortium of 4 Companies v. Ministry of Public Works and Water Resources of an African State (Final)
359
Settlement Agreement [Text]
359
The Arbitral Tribunal
363
Preamble
363
Article 1 Definitions
364
Article 2
364
Article 3
366
Article 4
367
Article 5
367
Article 6
368
Article 7
368
Article 8
369
Article 9
369
Article 10
369
Article 11
369
Case 7
Hotel Company v. Construction Company
371
Summary
371
Held
372
I.
Arbitration Agreement
372
II.
Factual Background and Arbitral Proceedings
373
III.
Parties Submissions
376
A.
Claimant's Statement of Claim, Dated September 27, 2011
376
B.
Respondent's Statement of Defence, Dated November 3, 2011
377
The Arbitral Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction over the Dispute
377
Inadmissibility of the Presented Case
377
Merits of the Case
378
C.
Claimant's Reply, Dated December 6, 2011 to Respondent's Statement of Defense
379
Claimant's Reply on the Arbitral Tribunal's Lack of Jurisdiction
379
Claimant's Reply in Relation to Legal Capacity of the Claimant's Representative
379
Claimant's Reply to the Respondent's Presentation of the Merits of the Case
379
D.
Respondent's Rejoinder, Dated January 3, 2012
380
The Lack of Jurisdiction over the Dispute
380
Legal Capacity of Claimant's Legal Representatives
380
Merits of the Case
380
E.
Claimant's Post Hearing Memorial Dated June 24, 2012
381
Certain Factual Considerations
381
The Legal Framework
381
Refuting the Respondent's Contentions
382
Remedies and Relief Sought
385
F.
Respondent's Post Hearing Memorial Dated July 8, 2012
385
Defense
385
Claimant's Submission that Its Case Is Not Characterized as a Contractual Default
386
Respondent's Relief Sought
386
IV.
The Final Arbitral Award
386
A.
Jurisdictional Pleas and Claims
387
Lack of Jurisdiction to the Esteemed Arbitral Tribunal
387
Inadmissibility of the Case: Claimant's Legal Representative Lacks Legal Capacity or Interest
388
The Case Is Not Subject to or Fall Within the Scope of the Contractual Arbitration Clause
388
B.
Reimbursement of Interest on the Advance Payment
389
The Parties Agreement(s), Common Intention and Conduct
389
C.
Claimant's Other Claims
394
Respondent's Alleged Breach of the Requirements of Good Faith (the Bona Fide Obligation)
394
Interest Rate of 4% on the L.E. 4,075,000 Covering the Period from Filing the Case till the Date of the Full Payment
394
Compensation for Damages due to Respondent's Default Amounting to L.E.1,800,000 (a Total of L.E. 1,800,000 + L.E. 4,075,000)
394
D.
Arbitration Legal Costs and Expenses
395
E.
The Dispositive
395
Annex - Arbitration Rules
397
Index
425