SELECTED CASES BY TYPE OF CONTRACT INVOLVED
SELECTED CASES BY NATIONALITY OF THE PARTIES
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 | 17 |
| COLOMBIAN LAW | 8 |
| COSTA RICAN LAW | 4 |
| CYPRIOT LAW | 1 |
| CZECH LAW | 1 |
| DANISH LAW | 1 |
| DUTCH CARRIBEAN LAW | 1 |
| DUTCH LAW | 8 |
| ECUADORIAN LAW | 2 |
| EGYPTIAN LAW | 1 |
| ENGLISH LAW | 23 |
| FRENCH LAW | 11 |
| GERMAN LAW | 6 |
| GREEK LAW | 1 |
| INDIAN LAW | 2 |
| IRANIAN LAW | 1 |
| IRISH LAW | 1 |
| ISRAELI LAW | 1 |
| ITALIAN LAW | 32 |
|
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, Rome 9029 00-03-1998 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SHAREHOLDERS AGREEMENT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN AUSTRIAN COMPANY - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) AS LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - ART. 834 ITALIAN CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE REQUIRING ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT "TRADE USAGES" - REQUEST OF APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN "AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE USAGES" - REJECTED ART. 3.10 (GROSS DISPARITY) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - DISADVANTAGED PARTY'S STATE OF IGNORANCE - CONDITIONS ART. 6.2.2 (HARDSHIP) - ALTERATION OF EQUILIBRIUM DUE TO EVENT WHERE RISK ASSUMED BY DISADVANTAGED PARTY | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, Milano 8908 00-09-1998 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND LIECHTENSTEIN DISTRIBUTOR - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES - GOVERNED BY DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW)- APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE 1980 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS (CISG) AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES BOTH DEFINED AS NORMATIVE TEXTS THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED HELPFUL IN THE INTERPRETATION OF ALL CONTRACTS OF AN INTERNATIONAL NATURE INTERPRETATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - INTERPRETATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOOD FAITH (ARTS. 1337 AND 1362-1371 OF ITALIAN CIVIL CODE; ARTS. 1.7 AND 4.1 - 4.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) MODIFIED ACCEPTANCE - AMOUNTS TO COUNTER-OFFER - TACIT ACCEPTANCE OF COUNTER-OFFER BY ACT OF PERFORMANCE (ART. 1326(5) OF ITALIAN CIVIL CODE; ART. 19(1)(2) CISG AND ART. 2.11 [ART. 2.1.11 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) INTEREST - APPLICABLE RATE - RATE GENERALLY APPLIED IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE FOR CONTRACTUAL CURRENCY | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11051 00-07-2001 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES - ITALIAN LAW AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASED ITS DECISION ON THE RELEVANT PROVISION OF THE ITALIAN CIVIL CODE ADDING THAT "SUCH SOLUTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT CUSTOM OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE OF WHICH THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES ARE AN EXPRESSION" QUESTION AS TO TIME FROM WHEN INTEREST IS DUE - INTEREST DUE AS FROM TIME THE PAYMENTS ARE DUE (SEE ARTICLE 1282 OF THE ITALIAN CIVIL CODE AND ARTICLE 7.4.9 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc arbitration 04-12-2001 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) - CONTRACT REFERRING TO “GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW, TO THE EXCLUSION OF ANY SINGLE NATIONAL SYSTEM OF LAW” AS APPLICABLE LAW – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO RESORT, IN CASE OF LACUNAE, TO ITALIAN LAW PROVIDED THAT IT IS NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE FORMER TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR BREACH OF THE “FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENTS OF GOOD FAITH, TRUST AND FAIR DEALING WHICH ARE AT THE VERY HEART OF ANY BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP” - NO PROVISION TO THIS EFFECT IN THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (1994 EDITION) – RECOURSE TO ARTICLE 1671 ITALIAN CIVIL CODE ON TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF WORKS CONTRACTS BY EMPLOYER | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11739 00-00-2002 PARTIES' CHOICE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE, SUPPLEMENTED IF NECESSARY BY ITALIAN LAW DISPUTED ISSUES CONCERNED NATURE OF CONTRACT, CONTRACT INTERPRETATION, LIABILITY FOR NON-PERFORMANCE, AMOUNT OF DAMAGES, RIGHT TO INTEREST AND APPLICABLE RATE, AND CURRENCY OF PAYMENT ALL ISSUES DECIDED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Camera Arbitrale Nazionale e Internazionale di Milano 28-11-2002 BUSINESS PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND A LUXEMBOURG COMPANY - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE REFERRING TO A DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - PARTIES' CONDUCT OR UNDERSTANDING PRIOR OR SUBSEQUENT TO CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT RELEVANT UNDER RULES OF INTERPRETATION OF THE APPICABLE LAW (ART. 1362 ITALIAN CIVIL CODE) MERGER CLAUSE CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT - DOES NOT AFFECT RULES OF INTERPRETATION OF THE APPLICABLE LAW | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11926 00-00-2003 INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW – SOLE ARBITRATOR DECIDES TO APPLY TRANSNATIONAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES SUCH AS THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW OR THE CENTRAL LIST OF PRINCIPLES AND RULES OF THE LEX MERCATORIA – SUCH PRINCIPLES TO BE COMPARED WITH CORRESPONDING PROVISIONS OF ITALIAN LAW AS THE OTHERWISE APPLICABLE LAW IN ORDER TO AVOID TAKING EITHER OF THE PARTIES BY SURPRISE | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11880 00-00-2004 BANK GUARANTEE - CONTRACT CONTAINING A CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE ACCORDING TO WHICH “THE ARBITRATORS SHALL APPLY THE PRINCIPLES OF UNIDROIT AND THE LAWS OF ITALY AS TO ALL MATTERS NOT EXPRESSLY COVERED BY THIS GUARANTY […]” CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIES ARTICLE 4.1 - 4.8 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES NOT ONLY BECAUSE IN SUBSTANCE CORRESPONDING TO CORRESPONDING RULES OF ITALIAN LAW BUT ALSO BECAUSE ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES “REPRESENT [...] A KIND OF SUMMARY OF THE GENERALLY COMMONLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES ON INTERPRETATION DEVELOPED IN THE WESTERN COUNTRIES AND DERIVING FROM THE MAIN CIVIL LAW CODES AND CASE LAW IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE.” | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 12745 00-00-2005 INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) ASSIGNMENT OF A CONTRACT - WHEN IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE VIS-À-VIS THE OTHER PARTY - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 9.3.4 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Corte arbitrale nazionale ed internazionale di Milano 00-03-2008 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - GOVERNED BY ITALIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO STATE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOLUTIONS ADOPTED UNDER ITALIAN LAW AND INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES PARTIES' DUTY TO COOPERATE AS APPLICATION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH (ART. 1375 ITALIAN CIVIL CODE) - REFERENCE TO ART. 5.1.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - PARTY PREVENTED FROM TERMINATING THE CONTRACT AFTER LEADING THE OTHER PARTY TO BELIEVE IT WOULD TOLERATE THAT PARTY'S BREACH - BELIEF MUST BE REASONABLE - REFERENCE TO ART. 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DAMAGES - AMOUNT MY BE ASSESSED AT DISCRETION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL IF ACTUAL LOSS PROVED (ART. 1226 ITALIAN CIVIL CODE) - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Permanent Court of Arbitration 17-12-2010 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LEASE CONTRACT - BETWEEN THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT (IFAD) AND AN ITALIAN REAL ESTATE COMPANY - AGREEMENT TO BE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED ACCORDING TO "[...] THE RECOGNIZED PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW" TO THE EXCLUSION OF ITALIAN LAW - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED "AS INDICATIVE OF RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW" LIMITATION PERIOD - "WEAK SUBSTANTIVE APPROACH" ADOPTED BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (CF. ARTICLE 10.9) | |
|
Arbitral Award International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation 03-02-2012 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN BUYER AND AN ITALIAN SELLER - GOVERNED BY ITALIAN LAW (INCLUDING CISG) - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING CISG TERMINATION OF CONTRACT - PARTIAL TERMINATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.6(2) (NOW ART 7.3.7) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT - CLAIM FOR PENALTY FOR DELAY IN RETURNING THE PAYMENT MADE - REFERENCE TO 7.3.5 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 20757 12-05-2017 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT FOR THE USE OF TELECOMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURES - RELATED MAINTENANCE SERVICE CONTRACT -BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE - APPLICATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING IN CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - NOT UNANIMOUSLY RECOGNIZED BY ITALIAN LEGAL WRITERS AND CASE LAW - REFERENCE, AMONG OTHERS, TO ARTS. 6.2.3 (1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND 6:111 PECL IN SUPPORT OF THE SOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUEST FO RENEGOTIATIONS - MUST BE ADEQUATELY MOTIVATED AND DOES NOT IN ITSELF ENTITLE THE DISADVANTAGED PARTY TO WITHHOLD ITS PERFORMANCE - REFERENCE TO ART. 6.2.3 (2) AND (3) | |
|
Italy Tribunale Roma 28-07-2004 DAMAGE CLAIM BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) TERMINATION - RESTITUTION BY PARTIES OF PERFORMANCES RECEIVED - ALLOWANCE IN MONEY IF RESTITUTION IN KIND IMPOSSIBLE - ALLOWANCE TO BE MADE ONLY IF REASONABLE (ARTICLE 7.3.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Italy Tribunale Bergamo 19-04-2006 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - BILLBOARD LEASE CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN COMPANIES REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) CONTRACT INFRINGING MANDATORY RULE OF THE APPLICABLE LAW - A PARTY'S CLAIM FOR RESTITUTION OF PERFORMANCE RENDERED DEPENDENT ON THAT PARTY'S POSSIBILITY OF MAKING RESTITUTION IN KIND OF THE OTHER PARTY'S PERFORMANCE RECEIVED (GENERIC REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 81(a) CISG) | |
|
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 Tribunale Terni 22-03-2010 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT IF ONE OF THE PARTIES CEASES TO EXIST - INADMISSIBLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES ADMITTING AVOIDANCE ONLY FOR MISTAKE, FRAUD, THREAT AND GROSS DISPARITY | |
|
Italy Tribunale Nola 06-12-2010 DAMAGE CLAIM BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) TERMINATION - PARTY'S CLAIM FOR RESTITUTION OF PERFORMANCE RENDERED DEPENDENT ON PARTY'S POSSIBILITY OF MAKING RESTITUTION IN KIND OF THE OTHER PARTY'S PERFORMANCE RECEIVED (GENERIC REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 81(A) CISG) | |
|
Italy Tribunale Torino - Sez. lavoro 02-02-2011 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND THE ITALIAN NATIONAL PENSION INSTITUTE (INPS) - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Corte dei Conti - Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Siciliana 21-03-2011 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN ITALIAN INDIVIDUAL AND AN ITALIAN PUBLIC AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS GENERATED BY THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY - PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Tribunale di Varese (Sezione distaccata di Luino) 05-01-2012 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND SOME ITALIAN INDIVIDUALS - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS FOR INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Corte dei Conti - Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Siciliana 24-01-2012 DISPUTE BETWEEN ITALIAN PARTIES - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Tribunale di Pisa 20-10-2016 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN INDIVIDUALS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) SALES CONTRACT OF IMMOVABLE GOOD SUBJECT TO CONDITION (ERECTION OF A WALL APPROVED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY) - ON CONCLUSION OF THE "PRELIMINARY" CONTRACT BUYER PAID SELLER THE AGREED DEPOSIT WHILE SELLER ENSURED THE BUYER TO HAVE FILED THE APPLICATION FOR THE REGULARISATION OF THE WALL - WHEN THE REGULARISATION WAS ULTIMATELY DENIED, BUYER REQUESTED THE RETURN OF THE DEPOSIT - THE COURT ORDERED SELLER TO RETURN THE DEPOSIT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT HE HAD CREATED IN THE BUYER THE LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION THAT THE REGULARISATION OF THE WALL WOULD BE GRANTED - IN SUPPORT OF ITS DECISION THE COURT INVOKED THE PRINCIPLES OF GOOD FAITH AND OF THE PROHIBITION OF VENIRE CONTRA FACTUM PROPRIUM AS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLES 1.7 AND 1.8 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Tribunale di Milano 14-02-2017 DAMAGE CLAIM BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) TERMINATION - RESTITUTION BY PARTIES OF PERFORMANCES RECEIVED - ALLOWANCE IN MONEY IF RESTITUTION IN KIND IMPOSSIBLE - ALLOWANCE TO BE MADE ONLY IF REASONABLE (ARTICLE 7.3.6 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. Piemonte 08-06-2017 DAMAGE CLAIM BROUGH BY A COMPANY OF STATE X AGAINST AN ITALIAN MUNICIPALITY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) PLOT OF LAND ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED FOR USE AS NATURAL PARK - VARIATION ORDER ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY CONCERNING THE POSSIBILITY TO BUILD ON THAT PLOT OF LAND - SUBSEQUENTLY REVOKED BY MUNICIPALITY - REFERENCE BY THE COURT TO THE PROHIBITION OF VENIRE CONTRA FACTUM PROPRIUM AND TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Tribunale di Bergamo 15-09-2017 SERVICE CONTRACT FOR COLLECTION OF LOCAL TAXES - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MUNICIPALITY AND AN ITALIAN COMPANY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LA (ITALIAN LAW) CHANGE OF COLLECTING METHOD INTRODUCED BY LAW - COLLECTING METHOD PREVIOUSLY USED BY COMPANY NO LONGER APPROPRIATE - REQUEST BY COMPANY TO RENEGOTIATE ORIGINAL CONTRACT - UPON REFUSAL BY MUNICIPALITY, COMPANY CLAIMS BREACH BY MUNICIPALITY OF ITS OBLIGATION TO RENEGOTIATE CONTRACT AS CONTAINED IN CONTRACT - CLAIM DISMISSED BECAUSE COURT HELD THAT IN CASE AT HAND MUNICIPALITY HAD FULFILLED ITS DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
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 | |
|
Italy Corte dei Conti - Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Siciliana 29-09-2019 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN ITALIAN INDIVIDUAL AND AN ITALIAN PUBLIC AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS GENERATED BY THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY - PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Corte dei Conti - Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Siciliana 14-02-2020 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN ITALIAN INDIVIDUAL AND AN ITALIAN PUBLIC AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS GENERATED BY THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY - PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy T.A.R. Campania 04-05-2020 DISPUTE BETWEEN ITALIAN PARTIES - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) NOTION OF FORCE MAJEURE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
| 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 | 2 |
| LEBANESE LAW | 2 |
| LIBYAN LAW | 1 |
| LITHUANIAN LAW | 16 |
| MEXICAN LAW | 3 |
| NEW ZEALAND LAW | 5 |
| NORWEGIAN LAW | 2 |
| PAKISTANI LAW | 1 |
| PAKISTANI LAW | 1 |
| PARAGUAYAN LAW | 30 |
| POLISH LAW | 6 |
| PORTUGUESE LAW | 3 |
| QUEBEC LAW | 4 |
| ROMANIAN LAW | 6 |
| RUSSIAN LAW | 79 |
| SAUDI LAW | 1 |
| 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 International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation 03-04-2018 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN BUYER AND A UKRAINIAN SELLER - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY CISG AND, FOR QUESTIONS NOT PROVIDED FOR IN THE CISG, THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES SINCE THE PARTIES EXPRESS THEIR INTENTION TO EXCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF ANY NATIONAL LAW RIGHT TO INTEREST - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE INTEREST RATE |
|
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 |
|
Venezuela Civil Chamber of the Venezuelan Supreme Court 02-12-2014 CONTRACT BETWEEN A VENEZUELAN COMPANY AND A DUTCH COMPANY - SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - CONTRACT GOVERNED BY THE LAW WITH WHICH IT IS MOST DIRECTLY CONNECTED - TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS, AMONG OTHERS, OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW RECOGNIZED BY INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (ART. 30 VENEZUELAN ACT ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW) - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EXPRESSLY REFERRED TO AS AN EXAMPLE OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES |
|
Venezuela Civil Chamber of the Venezuelan Supreme Court 17-03-2023 BILL OF EXCHANGE - SIGNED BY VENEZUELAN INDIVIDUALS IN CURAÇAO – APPLICABLE LAW IN THE ABSENCE OF A CHOICE OF THE PARTIES – REFERENCE TO LEX MERCATORIA CONTAINED IN THE NATIONAL PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN EXPRESSION OF THE LEX MERCATORIA LAW APPLICABLE TO A BILL OF EXCHANGE - MONETARY OBLIGATION FOR WHICH THE PARTIES DID NOT CHOOSE THE APPLICABLE LAW - OBLIGATION SUBJECT TO THE LAW OF THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE - OBLIGEE’S PLACE OF BUSINESS” AS THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE (ART. 6.1.6[1][a] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES). |