SELECTED CASES BY TYPE OF CONTRACT INVOLVED

KEYWORD Count of Cases
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS 14
AGENCY CONTRACT 8
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT 7
ASSIGNMENT CONTRACT 2
BANK GUARANTEE 3
BARTER AGREEMENT 2
BUILD-OPERATE-TRANSFER (BOT) CONTRACT 1
BUSINESS PURCHASE AGREEMENT 1
CONCESSION CONTRACT 6
CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT 2
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 1
CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT CONTRACT 1
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 29
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration (Place unknown)

00-00-0000
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES OIL COMPANY AND THE GOVERNMENT OF A STATE OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION – CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE IN FAVOUR OF DOMESTIC LAW OF THAT STATE - ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DOMESTIC LAW IN QUESTION NOT FULLY DEVELOPED – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT IT

INVESTMENT CONTRACT GRANTED FOREIGN INVESTOR A LONG-TERM CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY TO CUSTOMERS IN HOSTING STATE AT PROFITABLE PRICES – DUE TO SUBSEQUENT CHANGES IN ENERGY SUPPLY SYSTEM OF HOSTING STATE SUPPLY OF ENERGY BY FOREIGN INVESTOR NO LONGER PROFITABLE – REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 1.4, 6.2.2-6.2.3 AND 7.1.7 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 8873

00-07-1997
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A SPANISH COMPANY AND A FRENCH COMPANY - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) AS LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - PARTY'S REQUEST THAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS TRADE USAGES (ART. VII GENEVA CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION ART. 13(5) OF THE ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION) - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECISION NOT TO APPLY THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

HARDSHIP PROVISIONS IN THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 6.2.2 AND 6.2.3) - DO NOT PRESENTLY REFLECT CURRENT PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration (Uruguay)

30-12-1998
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT – BETWEEN AN URUGUAYAN HOTEL COMPANY AND TWO BRAZILIAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES - PARTIES’ CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (URUGUAYAN LAW) AS LAW GOVERNING THE DISPUTE – REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO THE 1994 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 2.18, 4.2.2., 4.6) TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SOLUTION REACHED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW CORRESPONDED TO INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 10385

00-03-2002
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A WEST AFRICAN STATE AND AN AFRICAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY - CONTRACT SILENT AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL EXCLUDES APPLICATION NOT ONLY OF ANY DOMESTIC LAW BUT ALSO OF THE LEX MERCATORIA BECAUSE OF ITS UNCERTAIN NATURE AND SCOPE - MENTION IN THIS CONTEXT OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, DESCRIBED AS "COMPLEMENTING IF NOT EVEN COMPETING WITH" THE LEX MERCATORIA
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

09-04-2008
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A POLISH COMPANY AND A RUSSIAN COMPANY - CONTRACT GOVERNED BY RUSSIAN LAW

CLAIM TO HAND OVER FULL SET OF TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, HAVING FOUND NO SPECIFIC REGULATION IN RUSSIAN LAW DEALING WITH SUCH REQUEST OF SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, APPLIED ARTICLE 7.2.2 ("PERFORMANCE OF NON-MONETARY OBLIGATION") OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

09-04-2009
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A POLISH COMPANY AND A RUSSIAN COMPANY

UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES APPLIED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO SUBSTANCE OF DISPUTE TOGETHER WITH RUSSIAN LAW

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - RIGHT TO REQUIRE PERFORMANCE OF NON-MONETARY OBLIGATION - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.2.2 LIT. C) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, 15956

00-06-2010
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM THAT SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (UNKNOWN) IS IN CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

CONTRACTUAL TERMS TO BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF THE WHOLE CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO ART. 4.4

CONTRACTUAL TERMS TO BE INTERPRETED SO AS TO GIVE EFFECT TO ALL THEM RATHER THAN TO DEPRIVE SOME OF THEM OF EFFECT - REFERENCE TO ART. 4.5
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

23-08-2012
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN COMPANY AND A UNITED STATES COMPANY - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIED RUSSIAN LAW AND, AT THE REQUEST OF THE UNITED STATES COMPANY, ALSO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Centro de Arbitraje y Conciliación Mercantil de la Cámara de Comercio de Bogotá

20-05-2015
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A COLOMBIAN COMPANY AND A COLOMBIAN CORPORATION - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (COLOMBIAN LAW)

IMPLIED OBLIGATIONS – REFERENCE TO ARTS. 5.1.1 AND 5.1.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - VIOLATION - REDUCTION OF THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES DUE
Arbitral Award
China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC)

31-10-2016
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (rectius SUB-CONTRACT AGREEMENT OF ENGINEERING, PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION) - BETWEEN CHINESE AND INDONESIAN POWER PLANT ENGINEERING COMPANIES AND AN INDONESIAN ENGINEERING COMPANY - PARTIES´ CHOICE OF SINGAPORE LAW AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE AGREEMENT - WHEN DISPUTE AROSE NEITHER PARTY ABLE TO PROVE CONTENT OF SINGAPORE LAW WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES AT STAKE - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL INVOKING ART. 49 (1) OF CIETAC ARBITRATION RULES 2015 APPLIES UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS LAW APPLICABLE TO SUBSTANCE OF DISPUTE

NON - PERFORMANCE OF AGREEMENT - RIGHT OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES TO TERMINATE AGREEMENT AND TO CLAIM RESTITUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTS. 7.3.1 AND 7.3.6 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - ASSESSMENT OF AMOUNT OF DAMAGES PURSUANT TO ART. 7.3.4 (3) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - AMOUNT REDUCED PURSUANT ART. 7.4.7 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES SINCE HARM SUFFERED BY AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN PART DUE TO CONDUCT OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES
Arbitral Award
Centro de Arbitraje y Conciliación Mercantil de la Cámara de Comercio de Bogotá

27-06-2019
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO COLOMBIAN PARTIES - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING OR SUPPLEMENTING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (COLOMBIAN LAW)

NOTION OF NON-PERFORMANCE - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.1.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEAR DEFINITION IN THE APPLICABLE LAW

MITIGATION OF HARM – DUTY TO MITIGATE - REDUCTION IN DAMAGES TO THE EXTENT AGGRIEVED PARTY HAS FAILED TO MITIGATE HARM - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.4.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ARTICLE 77 CISG
Australia
Supreme Court of New South Wales

01-10-1999
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY AUSTRALIAN LAW

AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - CONTRACT CLAUSE REQUIRING PARTIES TO MAKE DILIGENT EFFORTS TO RESOLVE THEIR DISPUTE - ENFORCEABLE - REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Australia
Supreme Court of New South Wales - Court of Appeal

11-06-2004
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO AUSTRALIAN PARTIES - SUBJECT TO AUSTRALIAN LAW - CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR PAYMENTS TO BE MADE IN AGREED INSTALMENTS THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE WORK - INSTALMENTS NOT CONDITIONAL ON COMPLETION OF WORK - REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 6.1.4, COMMENT 2, OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
Australia
Supreme Court of New South Wales Court of Appeal

03-07-2009
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (AUSTRALIAN LAW)

AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - ENFORCEABLE UNDER AUSTRALIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Brazil
Tribunal de Contas da União

07-12-2011
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A BRAZILIAN OIL COMPANY AND FOREIGN COMPANIES

HARDSHIP - ARTICLES 6.2.1 TO 6.2.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EXPRESSION OF LEX MERCATORIA

HARDSHIP - SUBSTANTIAL APPRECIATION OF A PARTICULAR NATIONAL CURRENCY (BRAZILIAN REAL) VIS-A-VIS ANOTHER NATIONAL CURRENCY (U.S. DOLLAR) - EVENT FORESEEABLE AT TIME OF CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT - HARDSHIP EXCLUDED
Canada
Cour d'Appel, Province de Québec, District of Montreal

16-05-2014
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CANADIAN COMPANY AND A UNITED STATES COMPANY – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTION FOUND UNDER THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (QUEBEC LAW)

INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOR – DUTY OF CO-OPERATION - UNEXPECTED DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY CONTRACTOR IN COURSE OF PERFORMANCE DUE TO INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOR AND LACK OF CO-OPERATION BY PURCHASER – PURCHASER LIABLE FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS CAUSED TO CONTRACTOR – REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.7, 1.8 AND 5.1.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SAME CONCLUSION REACHED ON THE BASIS OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH LAID DOWN IN CIVIL CODE OF QUEBEC
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

29-07-2008
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CONGOLESE COMPANY CONTROLLED BY A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND THE CONGOLESE GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET NATIONAL LAW (CONGOLESE LAW)

DISPUTE OVER THE LATTER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE PRICE OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ENTERED INTO WITH THE FORMER

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT NO CONTRACT HAD EVER BEEN CONCLUDED OR HAD NOT BEEN CONCLUDED IN WRITING - OBJECTION REJECTED - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 2.1.1 AND 1.2 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTE HAD ARISEN WHEN COMPANY WAS NOT YET CONTROLLED BY A US NATIONAL - OBJECTION ACCEPTED - MERE NON-PERFORMANCE AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE 7.1.1 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004 AMOUNTS TO DISPUTE

DISSENTING OPINION BY ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - DECISION IF AND WHEN TO TRANSFORM OBLIGOR'S FAILURE TO PERFORM INTO DISPUTE UP TO OBLIGEE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 7.1.4 AND 7.1.5(1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004
Italy
Tribunale Catania

06-02-2009
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW)

CONTRACT TERMINATION - RESTITUTION OF PERFORMANCES RENDERED - ALLOWANCE OF MONEY IF RESTITUTION IN KIND IMPOSSIBLE OR INAPPROPRIATE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.6(1)[ART. 7.3.6(2) OF THE 2010 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Italy
T.A.R. Molise

17-05-2017
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN ITALIAN LOCAL AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW)

DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - APPLICABLE ALSO TO PUBLIC AUTHORITY - WHENEVER A CHANGE IN THE FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES RENDERS THE CONTRACT UNBALANCED - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TOGETHER WITH PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND GANDOLFI CONTRACT CODE
Italy
T.A.R. Lombardia

23-07-2019
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN ITALIAN LOCAL AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW)

DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - APPLICABLE ALSO TO PUBLIC AUTHORITY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TOGETHER WITH PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW
Lithuania
Supreme Court of Lithuania

28-11-2014
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO LITHUANIAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LITHUANIAN LAW).

HARDSHIP - PRESUPPOSES FUNDAMENTAL ALTERATION OF CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT - ARTICLE 6.204 OF THE LITHUANIAN CIVIL CODE INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLES 6.2.1, 6.2.2 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

HARDSHIP - INSOLVENCY OF ONE PARTY - ADAPTATION OF CONTRACT JUSTIFIED ONLY IF INSOLVENCY CAUSES FUNDAMENTAL INCREASE OF THE COST OF INSOLVENT PARTY'S PERFORMANCE OR DECREASE IN VALUE OF OTHER PARTY'S COUNTER-PERFORMANCE
Lithuania
Supreme Court of Lithuania

09-01-2015
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO LITHUANIAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LITHUANIAN LAW)

EXERCISE BY A PARTY OF A REMEDY PROVIDED IN THE CONTRACT WITHOUT BEING ENTITLED TO DO SO - CONTRARY TO GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 6.158 OF THE LITHUANIAN CIVIL CODE AND TO ARTICLE 1.7 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Russian Federation
Arbitrazh Court of Sakhalin region

26-05-2014
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN LOCAL AUTHORITY AND A RUSSIAN COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS FOR INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (RUSSIAN LAW)

CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM - PERFORMANCE DELAYED DUE TO A FLOOD OF THE RIVER - FORCE MAJEURE EXCLUDED BECAUSE THIS EVNET COULD HAVE BEEN FORESEEN BY PARTY - REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE RUSSIAN DOMESTIC LAW AND TO ARTICLE 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
Russian Federation
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

02-07-2015
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BETWEEN A RUSSIAN COMPANY AND A RUSSIAN PUBLIC ENTITY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (RUSSIAN LAW)

QUESTION AS TO WHETHER TIME OF PERFORMANCE FIXED IN THE CONTRACT INCLUDED ALSO THE TIME FOR THE STATE INSPECTION OF THE WORKS. APPLICATION OF CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE AS RECOGNISED BY RUSSIAN CASE LAW AS WELL AS BY ARTICLE 4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Singapore
Singapore High Court

05-07-2011
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN SINGAPOREAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET OR SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW ( SINGAPOREAN LAW)

FAILURE OF SUBCONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE THE WORKS WITHIN AGREED TIME - MAIN CONTRACTOR´S REQUEST FOR DAMAGES - QUESTION AS TO WHETHER TIME OF COMPLETION WAS SET AT LARGE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Sweden
Högsta Domstolen (Supreme Court)

23-12-2013
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SWEDISH PARTIES - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS FOR INTERPRETING AND SUPPLEMENTING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SWEDISH LAW)

CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO BUSINESS PERSONS - CONSTRUCTOR'S DUTY TO INFORM PURCHASER THAT ITS ORDER WOULD NOT PRODUCE EXPECTED RESULTS - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
United Kingdom
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

12-03-2008
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - TRADITIONAL RULE THAT EVIDENCE OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS TO INTERPRET CONTRACT CLAUSE INADMISSIBLE - TO BE APPLIED WITH FLEXIBILITY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ART. 4.3) AND CISG (ART. 8)
United Kingdom
House of Lords

01-07-2009
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - TRADITIONAL RULE THAT EVIDENCE OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS TO INTERPRET CONTRACT CLAUSE INADMISSIBLE CONFIRMED - DIFFERENT APPROACH INSPIRED BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND CISG REFLECTING FRENCH PHILOSOPHY OF CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - AS SUCH INCOMPATIBLE WITH ENGLISH LAW
Uruguay
Tribunal Apelaciones Civil 2nd

27-08-2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO URUGUAYAN COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY URUGUAYAN LAW

RIGHT TO DAMAGES - COMPENSATION FOR HARM SUSTAINED BY AGGRIEVED PARTY AS A RESULT OF NON-PERFORMANCE - NON-PERFORMING PARTY LIABLE ONLY FOR FORESEEABLE HARM - REFERENCE BY THE COURT TO URUGUAYAN LAW (ART. 1346 C.C.) AS WELL AS TO ART. 7.4.4 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
CONSULTING CONTRACT 2
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION 2
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE 1
CONTRACT FOR TRANSFER OF FOOTBALL PLAYER 1
CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS 3
CONTRACT ON TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION 1
COOPERATION AGREEMENT 2
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 5
DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT 19
EASEMENT CONTRACT 3
EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT 2
EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT 1
INSURANCE CONTRACT 5
INTER-FIRM AGREEMENT 1
JOINT-VENTURE AGREEMENT 5
LAND USE CONTRACT 1
LEASE CONTRACT 16
LICENSING AGREEMENT 8
LICENSING AND JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT 1
LICENSING AND SERVICE AGREEMENT 1
LOAN AGREEMENT 11
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS 138
MARKETING AGREEMENT 1
MEDIATION AGREEMENT 1
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 7
PRE-BID AGREEMENT 1
PRODUCTION SHARING AGREEMENT 1
SALES CONTRACT 141
SATELLITE CONTRACT 3
SERVICE CONTRACT 43
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 9
SHARE OPTION AGREEMENT 1
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT 16
SHAREHOLDERS AGREEMENT 3
STATE CONTRACTS 37
SUPPLY CONTRACT 46
TRANSPORT CONTRACT 4
TRAVEL AGENCY CONTRACT 1

SELECTED CASES BY NATIONALITY OF THE PARTIES

KEYWORD Count of Cases
AFRICAN 5
ALGERIAN 1
ARGENTINIAN 14
AUSTRALIAN 17
AUSTRIAN 10
BAHAMIAN 1
BELGIAN 5
BELORUSSIAN 7
BERMUDIAN 1
BRAZILIAN 9
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLAND 1
BULGARIAN 1
CANADIAN 12
CENTRAL EUROPEAN 1
CHILEAN 1
CHINESE 34
COLOMBIAN 8
CONGOLESE 1
COSTA RICAN 5
CYPRIOT 7
CZECH 1
DANISH 3
DUTCH 22
DUTCH ANTILLEAN 1
EAST ASIAN 1
EASTERN EUROPEAN 6
ECUADORIAN 1
EGYPTIAN 1
ENGLISH 37
ESTONIAN 2
EUROPEAN 54
FINNISH 1
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) 1
FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF WALES 1
FRENCH 35
GEORGIAN 6
GERMAN 22
GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 1
GIBRALTAR 1
GREEK 4
HONG KONG 4
HUNGARIAN 3
INDIAN 10
INDONESIAN 1
INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT (IFAD) 1
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 3
IRANIAN 10
IRAQI 1
IRISH 1
ISRAELI 2
ITALIAN 50
IVORIAN 1
JAPANESE 5
KAZAKH 5
KOREAN 4
KUWAITI 4
KYRGYZ 1
LATIN AMERICAN 1
LEBANESE 5
LIBYAN 1
LIECHTENSTEIN 5
LITHUANIAN 16
LUXEMBOURG 1
MARSHALLESE 1
MEMBER FIRMS OF THE ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION 1
MEXICAN 4
MIDDLE EASTERN 4
MOLDAVIAN 1
MOROCCAN 1
NEW ZEALAND 5
NIGERIAN 1
NORTH AFRICAN 1
NORTH AMERICAN 1
NORWEGIAN 2
PAKISTANI 2
PANAMANIAN 1
PARAGUAYAN 22
PHILIPPINE 2
PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES 7
POLISH 14
PORTUGUESE 3
PUERTO RICAN 1
ROMANIAN 12
RUSSIAN 100
RWANDESE 1
SALVADORAN 1
SCANDINAVIAN 1
SCOTTISH 1
SERBIAN 2
SINGAPOREAN 4
SLOVAKIAN 1
SLOVENIAN 1
SOUTH AFRICAN 1
SOUTH KOREAN 1
SOUTHWEST ASIAN 1
SPANISH 41
STATE OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION 1
SWEDISH 8
SWISS 25
TURKISH 8
TURKMEN 1
UKRAINIAN 26
UNION OF EUROPEAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATIONS (UEFA) 1
UNITED KINGDOM 3
UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION 2
UNITED STATES 43
URUGUAYAN 3
UZBEK 2
VENEZUELAN 4
VIETNAMESE 1
WEST INDIAN 2
WESTERN EUROPEAN 2

SELECTED CASES BY DOMESTIC LAW INVOLVED

KEYWORD Count of Cases
ALGERIAN LAW 1
ARGENTINIAN LAW 9
AUSTRALIAN LAW 14
AUSTRIAN LAW 3
BELORUSSIAN LAW 6
BRAZILIAN LAW 4
CHINESE LAW 14
COLOMBIAN LAW 8
COSTA RICAN LAW 4
CZECH LAW 1
DANISH LAW 1
DUTCH CARRIBEAN LAW 1
DUTCH LAW 8
ECUADORIAN LAW 1
EGYPTIAN LAW 1
ENGLISH LAW 18
FRENCH LAW 10
GERMAN LAW 6
GREEK LAW 1
INDIAN LAW 2
IRANIAN LAW 1
IRISH LAW 1
ISRAELI LAW 1
ITALIAN LAW 32
IVORIAN LAW 1
JAPANESE LAW 1
KAZAKH LAW 1
KUWAITI LAW 1
LAW OF A EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY 1
LAW OF A NORDIC COUNTRY 1
LAW OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 1
LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 1
LEBANESE LAW 1
LIBYAN LAW 1
LITHUANIAN LAW 16
MEXICAN LAW 2
NEW ZEALAND LAW 5
NORWEGIAN LAW 2
PAKISTANI LAW 1
PAKISTANI LAW 1
PARAGUAYAN LAW 22
POLISH LAW 6
PORTUGUESE LAW 3
QUEBEC LAW 4
ROMANIAN LAW 5
RUSSIAN LAW 78
SCOTTISH LAW 1
SERBIAN LAW 1
SINGAPOREAN LAW 3
SPANISH LAW 30
SWEDISH LAW 5
SWISS LAW 14
TURKISH LAW 1
TURKMEN LAW 1
UKRAINIAN LAW 20
URUGUAYAN LAW 3

BY INTERNATIONAL LAW INVOLVED

Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 7365/FMS

05-05-1997
STATE CONTRACTS - CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE IRANIAN AIR FORCE - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (IRANIAN LAW) - AGREEMENT BY PARTIES AS TO COMPLEMENTARY AND SUPPLEMENTARY APPLICATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND TRADE USAGES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO DETERMINE CONTENT OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES

HARDSHIP - RIGHT TO DEMAND TERMINATION OR ADAPTATION OF CONTRACT (ART. 6.2.3(4) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

IMPLIED OBLIGATIONS - GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING (ARTS. 5.1 AND 5.2 [ARTS. 5.1.1 AND 5.1.2 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

TERMINATION - RIGHT TO RESTITUTION (ART. 7.3.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

INTEREST - RIGHT TO INTEREST INDEPENDENT OF A FORMAL REQUEST BY AGGRIEVED PARTY (ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - DOUBTFUL WHETHER THIS PROVISION CORRESPONDS TO GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111

06-01-2003
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUMANIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AND THE LEX MERCATORIA - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - ACADEMIC EXERCISE PRELIMINARY TO A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE - AS SUCH NOT YET APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS
Arbitral Award
Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

29-03-2005
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - GAS SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A GIBRALTAR COMPANY AND A KYRGYZ STATE OWNED COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES APPLIED AS A RULE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE PRICE DUE TO INSOLVENCY CAUSED BY INTERFERENCE BY ITS COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT - GOVERNMENT LIABLE FOR DAMAGES VIS-A-VIS SELLER

INTEREST - TO BE CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL RULES - APPLICATION OF ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL "TO BE AN APPROPRIATE BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE INTEREST"
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, Brussels

19-08-2005
STATE CONTRACTS - SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A DUTCH COMPANY AND THE POLISH GOVERNMENT - TO BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE BILATERAL TREATY FOR THE PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS AND "THE UNIVERSALLY ACKNOWLEDGED RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 14581

00-06-2007
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT FOR LEASING EQUIPMENT AND LICENSING TECHNOLOGY - BETWEEN TWO MINISTRIES OF STATE X AND A COMPANY OF STATE Y - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES"

ARBITRATION CLAUSE PROVIDING THAT DISPUTES TO BE DECIDED BY "THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION COURT IN SWITZERLAND" AND "IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW" - INTERPRETATION OF AMBIGUOUS CLAUSE ACCORDING TO SWISS LAW AS LAW OF SEAT OF ARBITRATION AND ACCORDING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INVOKED BY PARTES AS "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES", TOGETHER WITH EUROPEAN PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW AND CISG - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SIMILAR PROVISION IN SWISS LAW
Arbitral Award
Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission

17-08-2009
ERITREA ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION - DAMAGES CLAIMS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL LAW

DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION FOR UNCERTAIN LOSSES - ASSESSMENT AT DISCRETION OF ADJUDICATING BODY - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, The Hague

30-03-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES AND THE ECUADORIAN GOVERNMENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL AS ECUADORIAN LAW)

LOSS OF A CHANCE – CRITERION FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH OF THE BIT DUE TO DENIAL OF JUSTICE – REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ONLY ADMISSIBLE WHERE AMOUNT OF LOSS NOT DETERMINABLE – REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

FORCE MAJEURE – HARDSHIP – DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN A JUST AND EQUITABLE MANNER OF THE LOSSES AND GAINS RESULTING FROM UNFORESEEABLE EVENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (COMMENT ARTICLES 7.1.7 AND TO ARTICLES 6.2.2 – 6.2.3(2)) AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 6:111(3)(B)) AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET ECUADORIAN LAW (ARTICLE 1563 ECUADORIAN CIVIL CODE)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 17146

00-00-2013
INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL LAW (TRANSNATIONAL RULES AND TRADE USAGES)

ARBITRATION CLAUSE - INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH, OF EFFECTIVE INTERPRETATION AND OF CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - REFERENCE TO ART. 4.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Permanent Court of Arbitration

04-06-2014
DISPUTE BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN COMPANY AND THE SLOVAKIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE LATTER NEGATIVELY AFFECTING FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE SECTOR - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY SLOVAKIA OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

JURISDICTION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT CLAIMANT INITIATED COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC THAT WERE PREDICATED ON THE SAME FACTS AND LEGAL BASIS AND SOUGHT THE SAME RELIEF AS IN THE ARBITRAL PROCEEDING

IMPLIED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE CASE SHOULD BE RESOLVED IN THE NATIONAL COURTS, NOT IN THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS – REFERENCE BY BOTH PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 1.2, 2.1.2, 2.1.11, 3.2.12, 4.1 AND 4.2) – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AGREES WITH CLAIMANT THAT NO SUCH AGREEMENT WAS CONCLUDED

WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO ARBITRATE – REFERENCE BY BOTH PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONFIRMS THAT CLAIMANT HAS WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO ARBITRATE SINCE THE PROCEEDING BEFORE NATIONAL COURTS COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ONLY AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE
Arbitral Award
Permanent Court of Arbitration

10-01-2019
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN UNITED STATES INVESTORS AND THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT – BREACH OF THE LATTER OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE NORTH AMERICA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (NAFTA) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF A CHANCE - RIGHT TO COMPENSATION - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

DAMAGES – COMPENSATION FOR FUTURE HARM DUE WHEN THERE IS A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR SUCCESS – REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

04-06-2004
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - BUILD-OPERATE-TRANSFER (BOT) CONTRACT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ELECTRICITY PLANT IN TURKEY - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES-TURKISH CONSORTIUM AND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

CONTRACT WITH ESSENTIAL TERMS DELIBERATELY LEFT OPEN AND TO BE AGREED UPON AT LATER DATE - CONTRACT VALID IF PARTIES INTENDED TO BE BOUND BY THE CONTRACT - REFERENCE BY CLAIMANT TO ART. 2.14 (NOW 2.1.14) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES- ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

19-01-2007
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES-TURKISH CONSORTIUM AND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

CONCESSION CONTRACT CONCLUDED WITH TERMS LEFT OPEN - ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT NEVERTHELESS CONTRACT HAD BEEN VALIDLY CONCLUDED INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.14 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT THEREOF - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS

ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH DOES NOT ENTAIL OBLIGATION TO REACH AGREEMENT INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.15 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

01-09-2009
APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT OF AN ICSID AWARD RENDERED BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURTS WHERE AMOUNT CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED WITH SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY - REFERENCE BY CLAIMANT TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 (3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - STANDARD OF COMPENSATION CONFIRMED BY BOTH ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AND AD HOC COMMITTEE
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

14-01-2010
STATE CONTRACTS – SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES NATIONAL AND THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT - REFERRING TO ARTICLE 54 OF THE ICSID ADDITIONAL FACILITY ARBITRATION RULES RECORDED AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A PRIVATE CODIFICATION OF CIVIL LAW, APPROVED BY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION WHICH ARE NEITHER TREATY, NOR COMPILATION OF USAGES, NOR STANDARD TERMS OF CONTRACT BUT IN FACT ARE A MANIFESTATION OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO COMMON INTENTION OF PARTIES - RELEVANCE OF PRELIMINARY NEGOTIATIONS - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 4.1 AND 4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

MERGER CLAUSE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 2.1.17 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

DUTY TO USE BEST EFFORTS - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 5.1.4 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

03-03-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION AGREEMENT -BETWEEN GREEK AND ISRAELI INVESTORS AND THE GEORGIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF OIL PIPELINES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DISPUTE BETWEEN PARTIES AS TO SCOPE OF THE CONCESSION - WHETHER EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUING THE CONCESSION AGREEMENT - REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF ADMISSIBILITY - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, THOUGH WITHOUT EXPRESSLY REFERRING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, BASICALLY CONCURRED
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

16-06-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND ARGENTINIAN COMPANIES AND THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT – BIT AND GENERAL INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

DAMAGES – COMPENSATION DUE ONLY FOR HARM, INCLUDING FUTURE HARM, ESTABLISHED WITH REASONABLE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY – REFERENCE TO ART. 36 ILC DRAFT ARTICLES ON RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES FOR INTERNATIONALLY WRONGFUL ACTS OF 2001 AND TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

28-03-2011
STATE CONTRACTS – SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES NATIONAL AND THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED BREACH OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A PRIVATE CODIFICATION OF CIVIL LAW, APPROVED BY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION WHICH ARE NEITHER TREATY, NOR COMPILATION OF USAGES, NOR STANDARD TERMS OF CONTRACT BUT IN FACT ARE A MANIFESTATION OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DAMAGES FOR LOST PROFITS - TO BE DISTINGUISHED FROM DAMAGES FOR SIMPLE LOSS OF A CHANCE - REFERENCE TO THE EXAMPLE IN COMMENT 2 TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

12-05-2011
DISPUTE BETWEEN A SWISS COMPANY AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC - CONCERNING MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE LATTER NEGATIVELY AFFECTING FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN THE TOBACCO SECTOR - ICSID ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (PROTOCOL OF AGREEMENT) CONCLUDED BETWEEN THE PARTIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT AGREEMENT CONTAINING THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE WAS NULL AND VOID - LACK OF PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE - RESPONDENT CANNOT INVOKE THE VIOLATION OF ITS LOCAL LAW TO CONSIDER ITS CONSENT TO ARBITRATION VITIATED OR NULL

SEVERABILITY OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE - CLAIMANT INVOKING ART. 3.16 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES ON PARTIAL AVOIDANCE [NOW ART. 3.2.13] - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONCURS
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

31-10-2011
DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES INVESTOR AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY (BIT) - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY THE BIT AND "INTERNATIONAL LAW, WHEN APPLICABLE" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES "A SORT OF INTERNATIONAL RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW OF CONTRACTS REFLECTING RULES AND PRINCIPLES APPLIED BY THE MAJORITY OF NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEMS".

DEFENDANT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON GROUND OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF "PRECLUSION OF WRONGFULNESS" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 6.2.2, 7.1.6 AND 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

01-06-2012
DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND THE SALVADORAN GOVERNMENT OVER THE LATTER'S ARBITRARY REFUSAL TO GRANT THE FORMER A MINING EXPLOITATION CONCESSION - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTE HAD ARISEN WHEN CLAIMANT WAS NOT YET A UNITED STATES COMPANY

BREACH OF AN OBLIGATION UNDER INVESTMENT TREATY BY OMISSION - EXPLICIT REFUSAL TO GRANT CONCESSION NOT NECESSARY - MERE FAILURE TO RESPOND TO APPLICATION SUFFICIENT - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.1 UNDIROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

18-04-2017
STATE CONTRACTS – SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN NATIONALS AND THE ROMANIAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

COMPENSATION FOR LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY - CAN BE AWARDED ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURTS WHERE AMOUNT CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED WITH SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY - IN CASE OF LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY MUST BE TAKEN IN CONSIDERATION THE PROBABILITY OF THE CHANCE COMING TO FRUITION - REFERENCE TO THE EXAMPLE IN COMMENT 2 TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

30-10-2017
STATE CONTRACTS – LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SWISS COMPANIES AND THE VENEZUELAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISSENTING OPINION OF ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - COMPENSATION ONLY FOR FORESEEABLE HARM - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.4 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 74 CISG

DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISSENTING OPINION OF ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - LOSS OF PROFITS CALCULATED AS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACT PRICE AND THE PRICE PAID BY THE BUYER FOR REPLACEMENT GOODS OR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACT PRICE AND THE MARKET PRICE AT THE TIME DELIVERIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IF REPLACEMENT GOODS ARE NOT PURCHASED - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 7.4.5-7.4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 75-76 CISG
Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal
Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal (Full Tribunal)

02-07-2014
DISPUTE BETWEEN IRAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING ALLEGED BREACH BY UNITED STATES OF ITS OBLIGATION UNDER ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION ESTABLISHING THE IRAN-UNITED STATES CLAIMS TRIBUNAL – ACCORDING TO ARTICLE V OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION TRIBUNAL BOUND TO “DECIDE ALL CASES ON THE BASIS OF RESPECT FOR LAW, APPLYING SUCH CHOICE OF LAW RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW AS THE TRIBUNAL DETERMINES TO BE APPLICABLE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT RELEVANT USAGES OF TRADE, CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES”

UNITED STATES ORDERED TO PAY IRAN DAMAGES PLUS INTEREST – INTEREST CALCULATED “AT AN ANNUAL RATE EQUAL TO THE AVERAGE PRIME BANK LENDING RATE IN THE UNITED STATES” – TRIBUNAL SO DECIDED “[…] ALSO MINDFUL OF ARTICLE 7.4.9 (2) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2010”
Netherlands
Gerechtshof Den Haag

11-09-2013
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

REQUEST FOR SETTING ASIDE OF ARBITRAL AWARDS APPLYING THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS RULES OF LAW GOVERNING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE - REQUEST REJECTED BY COURT (DUTCH COURT)

APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ON ITS OWN MOTION OF ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - OBJECTION THAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL HAD EXCEEDED ITS MANDATE - REJECTED

LIMITATION PERIODS - A PARTY'S OBJECTION THAT OTHER PARTY'S CLAIMS WERE TIME-BARRED REJECTED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS THE 1994 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DID NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE

LIMITATION PERIODS - ARGUMENT THAT THE ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED IN THE SUBSEQUENT 2004 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES REJECTED - RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF SUBSEQUENT EDITIONS OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DENIED