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
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
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 11869

00-00-0000
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AUSTRALIAN SELLER AND BUYER OF UNKNOWN NATIONALITY - PARTIES' CHOICE OF ENGLISH LAW AS APPLICABLE LAW

ARBITRATION AGREEMENT PROVIDING “FOR ARBITRATION IN VIENNA, AUSTRIA, IN ACCORDANCE TO THE RULES OF ARBITRATION” - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO ARBITRATION TO BE HELD IN VIENNA IN ACCORDANCE WITH ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO PRINCIPLES OF “IN FAVOREM VALIDITATIS” AND “CONTRA PROFERENTEM” UNDER ENGLISH LAW AND TO PROVISIONS ON INTERPRETATION IN UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES WHICH ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL “THOUGH […] TO A LARGE EXTENT IDENTICAL TO THE ENGLISH CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION […] INCLUDE CERTAIN ADDITIONAL OR BROADER RULES THAT SUPPLEMENT THE ENGLISH PRINCIPLES TO AVOID THAT THE BAD DRAFTING LEADS TO THE UNCERTAINTY OF A CONTRACT”
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration (First Partial Award) 7110

00-06-1995
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY - CONTRACTUAL REFERENCE TO “LAWS OR RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE” – PARTIES’ INTENT TO EXCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF ANY DOMESTIC LAW IN FAVOUR OF “GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES ENJOYING WIDE INTERNATIONAL CONSENSUS” – APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "THE CENTRAL COMPONENT" OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES (CF. PREAMBLE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

APPLICABILITY OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF IMPLIED CHOICE BY THE PARTIES - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS THE LAW THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONSIDERS TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE ACCORDING TO ART. 13(3)[NOW ART. 17(1) ICC ARBITRATION RULES)
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, Rome

04-12-1996
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN ITALIAN COMPANY - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) AS LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DUTY TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT TRADE USAGES (ART. 834 ITALIAN CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE) REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A PARAMETER OF THE PRINCIPLES AND USAGES OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

VALID CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT EVEN WITHOUT ASCERTAINABLE SEQUENCE OF OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE (ARTS. 1.2, 2.1, 2.6, 2.12 [ARTS. 2.1.1, 2.1.6, 2.1.12 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

AVOIDANCE FOR MISTAKE (ARTS. 3.4 AND 3.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) OR FRAUD (ART. 3.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

GOOD FAITH ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM DUTY OF THE PARTIES THROUGHOUT THE CONTRACT

DAMAGES REFERENCE TO ARTS. 7.4.1 7.4.5, 7.4.7 7.4.9 AND 7.4.12 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN DETERMINATION OF DAMAGES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration (Second Partial Award) 7110

00-04-1998
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY

LIMITATION PERIODS - MATTER NOT DEALT WITH BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES [1994 EDITION] - RECOURSE TO OTHER INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED PRINCIPLES OF LAW - HELD THAT THERE IS NO SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLE PRESCRIBING A FIXED LIMITATION PERIOD WITHIN WHICH CLAIMS HAVE TO BE PURSUED

LIMITATION PERIOD - CLAIMS MAY BE TIME-BARRED IF PURSUED "WITH UNREASONABLE DELAY" (ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

RIGHT TO WITHOLD PERFORMANCE - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW (SEE ART. 7.1.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)- SELLER'S RIGHT TO WITHOLD DELIVERY OF GOODS IF BUYER FAILS TO PAY THE PRICE

MITIGATION OF HARM - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW (SEE ART. 7.4.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - SELLER ENTITLED TO DISPOSE OF THE GOODS AFTER THEIR STORAGE FOR A LENGTHY PERIOD

CONTRACT WITH TERMS DELIBERATELY LEFT OPEN - AGREEMENT NOT PREVENTED FROM COMING INTO EXISTENCE (ART. 2.14 [ART. 2.1.14 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 9593

00-12-1998
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES (ENGLISH, JAPANESE, IVORIAN) - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (IVORIAN LAW) AS LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER TRADE USAGES (ART. 13 (5) ICC RULES) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

PARTIES' DUTY TO COOPERATE IN PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT (ARTS. 1134(3) AND 1135 IVORIAN CIVIL CODE; ART. 5.3 [ART. 5.1.3 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 9594

00-03-1999
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY - BETWEEN A SPANISH COMPANY AND AN INDIAN COMPANY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF A SOLUTION ADOPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ENGLISH LAW)

DUTY TO MITIGATE LOSSES (ARTICLE 7.4.8 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES).
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

16-04-1999
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN PARTY AND AN ENGLISH PARTY - SILENT AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS ONE OF RELEVANT LEGAL SOURCES

INTERPRETATION OF A PARTY’S STATEMENTS AND CONDUCT – MEANING A REASONABLE PERSON OF SAME KIND AS THE OTHER PARTY WOULD GIVE TO IT (ART. 4.2(2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

25-01-2001
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN PARTY AND AN ENGLISH PARTY - SILENT AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS ONE OF RELEVANT LEGAL SOURCES

PENALTY CLAUSE – PAYMENT OF PENALTY FOR DELAY IN PAYMENT OF PRICE – PENALTY GROSSLY EXCESSIVE IN RELATION TO HARM SUFFERED BY AGGRIEVED PARTY (ART. 7.4.13(2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
Arbitration Court of the Lausanne Chamber of Commerce and Industry

17-05-2002
SATELLITE CONTRACT - PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES (TURKISH, WEST INDIAN, PHILIPPINE) - CONTRACT CONTAINING CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW (ENGLISH LAW OR SWISS LAW) - AT BEGINNING OF ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.

NON-PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT - DUTY TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH - DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY - CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO ARTICLES 1.7, 2.16 AND 4.6 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.

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 ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO ARTICLES 7.4.1, 7.4.2 AND 7.4.4 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 11849

00-00-2003
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND A UNITED STATES DISTRIBUTOR - CISG IN PRINCIPLE NOT APPLICABLE - PARTIES CHOOSE CISG AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE AGREEMENT - INDICATION OF PARTIES' INTENTION TO EXCLUDE APPLICATION OF ANY DOMESTIC LAW AND TO SUBJECT THE AGREEMENT TO NEUTRAL AND A-NATIONAL RULES OF LAW

AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT BY MEANS OF LETTER OF CREDIT - DISTRIBUTOR'S REFUSAL TO OPEN LETTER OF CREDIT - AMOUNTS TO FAILURE BY DISTRIBUTOR TO PERFORM ITS OBLIGATION UNDER AGREEMENT - MANUFACTURER ENTITLED TO TERMINATE AGREEMENT EX ART. 64(1)(B) CISG

AGREEEMENT PROVIDING FOR ANY ADDITION OR MODIFICATION TO BE MADE IN WRITING - ACCEPTANCE ON ONE OCCASION BY MANUFACTURER OF PAYMENT BY WIRE TRANSFER CONSIDERED NOT TO BE SUFFICIENT TO INDUCE DISTRIBUTOR REASONABLY TO BELIEVE THAT OPENING OF LETTER OF CREDIT NO LONGER REQUIRED - REFERENCE TO ART. 29(2) CISG AND TO ART. 2.18 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (1994) EXPRESSING A "GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE"

NOTICE OF TERMINATION - EFFECTIVE EVEN IF WRITTEN IN ITALIAN AND NOT IN ENGLISH AS REQUIRED BY AGREEMENT IF ADDRESSEE KNEW ITALIAN - REFERENCE TO ART. 27 CISG

NOTICE OF TERMINATION GIVEN BY MANUFACTURER KNOWING THAT DISTRIBUTOR HAS PERFORMED ITS OBLIGATION WITHIN ADDITIONAL TIME GRANTED - NOT EFFECTIVE (ART. 64(2)(A) CISG)

DAMAGES FOR WRONGFUL TERMINATION BY MANUFACTURER - LOSS OF PROFIT SUFFERED BY DISTRIBUTOR - TO BE COMPENSATED - REFERENCE TO ART. 74 CISG AND TO ART. 7.4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES STATING A "GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE OF LAW"

INTEREST - APPLICABLE RATE - INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATOR ENTITLED TO DETERMINE MOST APPROPRIATE RATE WITHOUT RESORT TO CONFLICT OF LAWS RULES - LIBOR FOR CURRENCY OF PAYMENT PLUS SPREAD OF TWO POINTS - CORRESPOND TO GENERALLY ACCEPTED RATE APPLIED ON INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MARKETS
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 Court of the Lausanne Chamber of Commerce and Industry

31-01-2003
SATELLITE CONTRACT - PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES (TURKISH, WEST INDIAN, PHILIPPINE) - CONTRACT CONTAINING CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AS THE THE APPLICABLE LAW (ENGLISH LAW OR SWISS LAW) - AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.

RIGHT TO DAMAGES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE - COMPENSATION DUE FOR HARM CAUSED BY NON-PERFORMANCE - AMOUNT OF COMPENSABLE HARM TO BE REDUCED IF HARM IN PART DUE TO AGGRIEVED PARTY (ARTICLES 7.4.2 AND 7.4.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES).

RIGHT TO INTEREST (7.4.9 AND 7.4.10 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES).
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111

03-10-2003
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A ROMANIAN MANUFACTURER AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - GOVERNED BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - GOODS TO BE DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO BUYER'S CUSTOMERS - GOODS ALLEGEDLY DEFECTIVE - PARTIES' FAILURE TO SETTLE CUSTOMERS' CLAIMS - SALES CONTRACT TERMINATED

DAMAGES - CONTRIBUTION OF AGGRIEVED PARTY TO HARM - APPORTIONMENT OF CONTRIBUTION TO THE HARM - DAMAGES REDUCED (ART. 7.4.7)

INTEREST - TO BE PAID FROM DATE AMOUNT DUE UNTIL FULL PAYMENT MADE (ART. 7.4.9(2))
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

06-07-2009
CONSULTING CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS FOR INTERPRETING AND SUPPLEMENTING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (RUSSIAN LAW)

CONSULTANCY CONTRACT BETWEEN RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 1.7 AND 5.1.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

04-10-2010
CURRENCY SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CYPRIOT COMPANY AND A MARSHALLESE COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS FOR INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ENGLISH LAW)

CURRENCY SALES CONTRACT BETWEEN CYPRIOT COMPANY AND COMPANY FROM THE MARSHALL ISLANDS - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIED ENGLISH LAW - REFERENCE ALSO TO ARTICLES 1.7 AND 5.1.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

30-08-2012
LOAN AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A CYPRIOT COMPANY AND A RUSSIAN COMPANY - CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIED ENGLISH LAW TOGETHER WITH THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

FREEDOM OF CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation

25-01-2013
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIED GERMAN LAW TOGETHER WITH THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
France
Cour d'Appel de Paris

23-06-2020
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - FRANCHISE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A LEBANESE COMPANY AND A KUWAITI COMPANY - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE IN FAVOUR OF ENGLISH LAW - ARBITRATION CLAUSE REFERRING TO "PRINCIPLES OF LAW GENERALLY RECOGNIZED IN INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS" - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AS AN EXPRESSION OF THOSE PRINCIPLES - NO VIOLATION OF THE ARBITRATION MANDATE
Italy
Tribunale Padova - Sez. Este

10-01-2006
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND AN ENGLISH DISTRIBUTOR

JURISDICTION - EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS - JURISDICTION OF COURT FOR PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

NEED FOR AN AUTONOMOUS INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION - RECOURSE TO CISG IN VIEW OF ITS LARGE CONSENSUS WORLDWIDE AND ITS IMPORTANCE AS MODEL FOR OTHER INSTRUMENTS ADOPTED AT EUROPEAN LEVEL

NOTION OF "CONTRACT OF SALE" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 1(1)(B)) - DEFINED ACCORDING TO CISG

NOTION OF "PLACE OF DELIVERY" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 5 (1)(B)) - RECOURSE TO ART. 31(A) CISG - SOLUTION CONFIRMED BY OTHER "AUTONOMOUS" INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS (SEE ART. 6.1.6(1)(B)) AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (SEE ART. 7:101(1)(B))
Italy
Tribunale di Brescia

27-06-2016
SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - DIFFERENT LANGUAGE VERSIONS

DIFFERENT FORUM SELECTION CLAUSE IN THE TWO VERSIONS - APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 23(C) OF EC REGULATION N. 44/2001 AND ARTICLE 4.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - EXCLUDED BECAUSE THE TWO VERSIONS WERE NOT DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS OF A COMMON ORIGINAL TEXT BUT WERE STIPULATED ONE AFTER THE OTHER AND THEREFORE THE SUBSEQUENT VERSION PREVAILS AS THE EXPRESSION OF THE NEW INTENTION OF THE PARTIES
Netherlands
Hoge Raad

24-04-2009
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - MILITARY EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND THE IRANIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET CONTRACT CLAUSE

TERMINATION - CONTRACTS TO BE PERFORMED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME - TERMINATION NOT AFFECTING PARTS ALREADY PERFORMED (ARTICLE 7.3.6 (2) [ART. 7.3.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Netherlands
Rechtbank's-Gravenhage

11-05-2011
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY

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
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
Netherlands
Hoge Raad

22-05-2015
STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY

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
New Zealand
Court of Appeal of New Zealand

27-11-2000
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION AND A JAPANESE BUSINESSMAN - GOVERNED BY A PARTICULAR DOMESTIC LAW (NEW ZEALAND LAW) - REFERENCE TO CISG AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DESCRIBED AS A "RESTATEMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL CONTRACT LAW OF THE WORLD [WHICH] REFINES AND EXPANDS THE PRINCIPLES CONTAINED IN [CISG]”

CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - LIBERAL INTERPRETATION (ART. 8 CISG; ARTS. 4.1-4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - PERMISSIBLE UNDER NEW ZEALAND LAW BUT NOT ENGLISH LAW
New Zealand
Court of Appeal of New Zealand

03-10-2001
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A NEW ZEALAND MANUFACTURER AND AN ENGLISH DISTRIBUTOR - GOVERNED BY NEW ZEALAND LAW

IMPLIED DUTY OF REASONABLENESS AND GOOD FAITH IN CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - RECOGNISED IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW (ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 7(1) CISG - DISSENTING OPINION
Romania
Bucharest Court of Appeal

24-10-2014
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH SELLER AND A ROMANIAN BUYER – SELLLER’S STANDARD TERMS CONTAINING AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN FAVOR OF AN ARBITRATION SEATED IN ENGLAND – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET ART. 23 OF EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS

EFFECTIVENESS OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN STANDARD TERMS UNILATERALLY PREPARED BY SELLER AND SENT TO BUYER BY E-MAIL – RECEIPT PRINCIPLE – REFERENCE TO ART. 1.10 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

EFFECTIVENESS OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN STANDARD TERMS UNILATERALLY PREPARED BY SELLER AND SENT TO BUYER BY E-MAIL – REFERENCE TO ARTS. 2.1.19 AND 2.1.20 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO AFFIRM THE VALIDITY AND WIDE DIFFUSION IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL PRACTICE OF THIS FORM OF CONTRACT CONCLUSION - BURDEN OF PROOF ON THE PARTY WHO PROPOSES AN INTERPRETATION DIFFERENT FROM THAT PROVIDED BY THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Russian Federation
Arbitrazh Court of Moscow

13-12-2010
REFERENCE TO UNIDROITB PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ENGLISH LAW)

ASSIGNMENT OF FUTURE RIGHTS - IN PRINCIPLE VALID - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 9.1.4 AND 9.1.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
United Kingdom
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

17-02-2006
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - WRITTEN CONTRACT CONTAINING A MERGER CLAUSE - ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND IN PARTICULAR OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 4.1-4.3) AND CISG (ART. 8)
United Kingdom
High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court

13-07-2006
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SATELLITE CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND A NIGERIAN COMPANY - STATING THAT IT WAS GOVERNED BY ENGLISH LAW AND TO BE INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO THE EXTENT THEY WERE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE FORMER

CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - COURT HELD THAT CONTRACT "BE CONSTRUED USING THE CONVENTIONAL CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS" WITHOUT EXPRESSLY REFERRING TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
United Kingdom
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

18-12-2006
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND IN PARTICULAR OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATION OF WRITTEN CONTRACTS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 4.1-4.3) AND CISG (ART. 8)
United Kingdom
High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court

22-05-2007
SHARE OPTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - INTERPRETATION OF AN OPTION DEED - REFERENCE BY PARTY TO PROFORCE RECRUIT V THE RUGBY GROUP CONTAINING A REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 4.1-4.3) IN SUPPORT OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS - ARGUMENT REJECTED BY COURT
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
United Kingdom
Supreme Court

05-11-2015
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN LEBANESE INDIVIDUALS AND DUTCH COMPANY - GOVERNED BY ENGLISH LAW - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM SOLUTION PROVIDED BY APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW

CONSUMER CONTRACT - BETWEEN ENGLISH PARTIES- GOVERNED BY ENGLISH LAW - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM SOLUTION PROVIDED BY APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW

PENALTY CLAUSES VOID AND UNENFORCEABLE UNDER ENGLISH LAW - REFERENCE TO OTHER DOMESTIC LAWS ADOPTING A SIMILAR RULE AS WELL AS TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTICLE 7.4.13) AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL SOFT LAW INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS UNCITRAL UNIFORM RULES ON CONTRACT CLAUSES FOR AN AGREED SUM DUE UPON FAILURE OF PERFORMANCE (ARTICLE 6)
United Kingdom
Supreme Court

16-05-2018
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LICENSING AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - FOR THE USE OF OFFICE SPACE IN LONDON - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS FOR INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ENGLISH LAW)

NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE IN WRITTEN CONTRACT - QUESTION AS TO WHETHER IT PREVENTS PARTIES FROM VALIDLY AGREEING ORALLY ON ANY MODIFICATION OF THE CONTRACT CONTROVERSIAL UNDER ENGLISH LAW - BINDING FORCE NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE AFFIRMED BY SUPREME COURT WITH REFERENCE, AMONG OTHERS, TO INTERNATIONAL SOURCES SUCH AS THE CISG AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
United Kingdom
Court of Appeal

20-01-2020
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - FRANCHISE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A LEBANESE COMPANY AND A KUWAITI COMPANY - ARBITRATION CLAUSE REFERRING TO "PRINCIPLES OF LAW GENERALLY RECOGNIZED IN INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS" - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE IN FAVOUR OF ENGLISH LAW - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AS AN EXPRESSION OF THESE PRINCIPLES - USE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES FOR INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ENGLISH LAW)

NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE IN WRITTEN CONTRACT - QUESTION AS TO WHETHER IT PREVENTS PARTIES FROM VALIDLY AGREEING ORALLY A MODIFICATION OF THE CONTRACT (I.E. ADDING ANOTHER PARTY TO A CONTRACT) - CONTROVERSIAL UNDER ENGLISH LAW - REFERENCE BY THE COURT TO ART. 2.1.18 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES WHICH EXPRESSES A PRINCIPLE OF LAW SIMILAR TO THAT EXPRESSED BY ENGLISH LAW

NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE IN WRITTEN CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO ART. 2.1.18 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES BY ONE OF THE PARTIES - CANNOT CONTRADICT THE EXPRESS PROVISION CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT
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