Magnifier Search

Ethyl v. Canada

Type of decisionAward on Jurisdiction
Date of decision24 June 1998
Tribunal
Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel (President)
Charles N. Brower
Marc Lalonde
Legal instrumentNorth American Free Trade Agreement
Further information

Statements from this decision

You are currently viewing the statements in their context. To view them in a list, click here.
Chapter 11 of NAFTA requires a distinction between jurisdictional and procedural provisions
A claimant consents to an arbitration by commencing it
Article 102(1) NAFTA specifies the object and purpose of NAFTA within the meaning of Article 31 VCLT
To be considered a measure within Article 1101 NAFTA, state conduct does not need to amount to a legal stricture
In case the claimant asserts a legislative act to be a state measure violating the treaty, it is sufficient that the act is in force at the time of the tribunal’s decision
Past ignored time limitations do not cause inadmissibility if the claimant could resubmit the very same claim successfully at the time of the decision on jurisdiction
Past ignored time limitations do not cause inadmissibility if the claimant could resubmit the very same claim successfully at the time of the decision on jurisdiction
Chapter 11 of NAFTA distinguishes between jurisdictional and procedural provisions
Greater elaboration of detail in the Statement of Claim is permissible and does not amount to an amendment delaying the proceeding

Feedback

Above you will find 8 statement(s) from this decision. Please note that when viewing the statements in their context, the same statement may appear multiple times if it is relevant for more than one topic. Did we miss something? Feel free to send us your suggestions!